The End of Mad

  With so many technological developments coming to the fore our ways of life will change to match. Among these developments are several ways to stop ballistic missiles. In a way this is a good thing because it will herald the end of MAD. This is also a bad thing. Drastic changes in what we can do can lead to chaos, and usually the scale of chaos is relative to the size of the change. The end of MAD is a very big change that could destroy the world without nuclear warheads. We, on any effective scale, must plan and determine the course of action for ourselves for this threat.

 The reason why we must do this is shown throughout history. Within Europe there have been so many conflicts that it takes a professor to keep track of them all. War does not simply end or abate, it simply ebbs and flows like the tide; every nation to itself, fighting for ultimate power. The Hundred Years war (1337-1453) was shortly followed by France vs. Burgundy (1461-1553). Who can say which was bloodier? Clearly, the urge to fight war is not only strong but unquenchable.

There are many given reasons that man in nature does not tolerate peace but is rather coerced into it. Aleister Crowley,( Liukkonen) Sigmund Freud,(Freud) and other such soul searching philosophers speak of the inner beast, or the innate drive to act as a beast. That is, to seek violence. Stanchinsky actually used psychology to create music, the effect is obvious and startling (youtube) Economic behaviors show that we actually need war for economic reasons. Where the depression of the 1930’s nearly sent the world into the dark ages the resulting anger and hatred for its possible causes created world war two. WWII was the largest and most effective war, to this point, in history. This resulted in a huge and nearly unstoppable wave of economic development and growth that lasted until the year 2000 or so. (Philzine)

Do not let appearances fool you, while we may appear to be in a semi- utopian state of peace, it is really a veiled version of the same agendas as a hundred years ago. The Iraq war is really a modern version of imperialism. Look at Germany in the 19th century, the nation chose to take over some remote land, some justifying it by saying they were helping the poor wretches. (Schuller) similar to when the U.S. made the Panama canal. There used to be a different country there, but it made no difference. It was simply overrun, destroyed, and in its place Panama was fostered into a good child.(Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs)  The U.S. is attempting to make every nation in the world democratic. Panama, for example, is a democracy. Iraq is becoming one as well. Or rather democracy in the modern sense, which is much different from what used to be. The reasoning behind this, as mentioned in the Domino Effect, is to make sure that other nations do not develop governments potentially antithetical to our own.(”domino-games.com”) When put in this way, what is the difference between risk management and control? The reason the U.S. government appears to be the only one doing this is because it is the only and most eminent superpower with nineteenth century European ideas of conquest.