Skip to main content
Before the start of the Great War, the prevailing sentiment in most, if not all, European countries was that victory in any major military conflict was guaranteed only if it was fought with a large, durable, well trained and modern army. The dawn of the 20th century established the environment in which countries entered the race to mobilize the largest part of the qualified population, to create faster motorized transport for troops and logistics, to use state of the art communications and the greatest range of artillery as well as to use various new drugs in medical treatments like morphine and even a cocaine to boost the troops and fuel their fighting mood. Comparing to 19th century wars, new warfare was revolutionized and upped to the next level. By June 1914, the stage was set and only a spark was needed to fire off the conflict. But was it really inevitable? Was the military race alone enough to cause the conflict in which 20 million died and many more wounded? Or did it need a pl
Posts
It is definitely not easy to answer this simple question with a word or sentence. Perhaps the best and only answer I could think of is that "it would make perfect sense" for the imminent future of humanity in 21st century and beyond. However within current world order we are living in today, it is far from being applicable for one 'teeny-tiny' reason - it would require canceling of what is well rooted today. The political system of Nation-State governmental polity that in one form or another exist almost everywhere on the planet. To cease that from existence is one of those Sisyphean tasks that is almost unimaginable to achieve. In simple words, in order to make City-State the only governmental polity we would have to nullify countries and to erase borders from the maps. Not only that, it also means the politics and politicians would have to reduce its influence and their numbers significantly which is also a task comparable to the impossible efforts from the mythical
It is definitely not easy to answer this simple question with a word or sentence. Perhaps the best and only answer I could think of is that "it would make perfect sense" for the imminent future of humanity in 21st century and beyond. However within current world order we are living in today, it is far from being applicable for one 'teeny-tiny' reason - it would require canceling of what is well rooted today. The political system of Nation-State governmental polity that in one form or another exist almost everywhere on the planet. To cease that from existence is one of those Sisyphean tasks that is almost unimaginable to achieve. In simple words, in order to make City-State the only governmental polity we would have to nullify countries and to erase borders from the maps. Not only that, it also means the politics and politicians would have to reduce its influence and their numbers significantly which is also a task comparable to the impossible efforts from the mythical Greek underworld.
If you ask me, Sisyphus, a cruel king of Corinth who was condemned forever to roll a huge stone up a hill in Hades would have better chance to place his boulder on the top than we to cancel all countries worldwide and give the cities well deserved independence. Nevertheless, let's see, in one mind experiment, if we hypothetically had today such social organisation of the world, how the life would be different. What would we gain and what would we loose in our way of living?
But before diving into more details about how planetary society could work with cities instead of countries perhaps we could check a little history. Contrary to what we might expect to learn about history of governmental polity and even though we are taking countries and borders for granted today, in the past sovereignty over a defined space wasn't strict at all. Countries as we know them started to be a social organisation around millennium before today but in the essence, before industrialization took place in early 19th century their existence and jurisdiction were much different. Before that point in history countries existed in realm of several big empires which were constantly colonizing smaller nations who on the other end were in constant fight over unclaimed land or neighboring territory. Big empires along with remnants of city-states from the renaissance and number of small principalities and provinces, many populated with people of same nationalities, were constructed with centers of power that were still in big fortified capital cities surrounding their royal palaces. During all those times before industrialization up to the middle of 19th century, borders were pretty loose term that travelers crossed without any checkpoints or passports of any kind.
History also had a good record of City-States, especially during the Renaissance period and it worked extremely well. Many cities across the Italian Peninsula, Mediterranean and Adriatic seas preserved their independence and flourished in almost every aspect of humanity. Milan, Venice, Rome, Turin, Naples, Ragusa and my favorite Florence was well-known examples from the late middle-age prosperity, especially in art and science. Even today, the spirit of the old days still lives in the very core of many Italian cities and in latest years the main example were Venetian online independence and autonomy referendums. They were unofficial in nature with their results being fully non-binding but in a nutshell, many residents of Veneto were and still are annoyed for the city paying enormous taxes to the Nation-State every year while in return they always receive less than given. The story goes even further in the realm of power and business and there are 'showcases' everywhere. For example the city of Niš in Serbia, where I live, was recently forced to give away its airport to the Nation-State to govern following a poor business deal between the national government and the owner of the airport in national capital which, believe it or not, limits the number of passengers and therefore further development of smaller nearby airports.
These two examples are just a tiny point of the iceberg in political absurdity of the relations between nation states and their cities. In hypothetical planetary cancellation of Nation-States and country borders even more ridiculous and superfluous affairs would follow and ceased to exist over time. If we exclude nullifying preposterous and vague speeches we heard every now and again, like those spoken by almost all politicians on power throughout the globe that "our nation is the greatest nation" or "our devotion to defend our nation is out of question", the real benefit would be in cancellation of enormous taxes for military budgets. No doubt, armed forces would not cease to exist but their move from national government hats into city halls would radically reduce the so called GFP or Global Firepower which in almost all countries took up to three quarters of national budget every year. If you are eager to know how big that numbers actually are I did some research in one of previous posts related to military named "Warfare Then and Now". I am not going into any debate how future warfare would look like in the world without borders but even if we found some logic in, for example, constant presence of Russian and American military forces in foreign countries such as Syria in recent years, it would be very far from common sense that in hypothetical City-State world, for example, cities of Seattle or Vladivostok would find any reason to send their armed forces onto Damascus streets. I really think that the most of the cities of the future would start minding their own business for the benefit of all the others. At least when GFP numbers are in question.
Furthermore, the potential of City-States networking outside of national borders is something countries cannot provide. The social policy within city walls could become more powerful and more effective. The big cities could also take care of their smaller neighbors more efficiently favoring production of domestic goods instead of hazardous imports of, for example, food over long distances. Traveling without unnecessary passport controls would be amazingly enjoyable and easy with technology providing invisible security controls on more checkpoints than just on airports, harbors or railway and road tolls without custom control at all. Yes, we would probably loose the joy of national competitions in sports but this would not be the real disadvantage, I am sure in one way or another the sport would survive and club competitions would take over with possible slightly modified Olympic games.
21st century and its further globalization primarily in the face of almighty internet is projecting completely new social environment for the future. Internet control is a battle that cannot be won even by using sophisticated surveillance or simple pulling the plugs out. Nor by introducing any national laws made in order to shape data control over the network. Similarly, according to UN, more than 50% of entire world population live now in cities and global migration toward urban settlements continues inevitably toward 60% at the end of next decade. For this trend being unstoppable as it seems, the network of cities of the future is something that will have the power to overcome the old ways. The outcome of the future countries that would become inefficient is inevitable and possibly even dangerous for further evolution of humanity and its survival. On the other hand, in a short conclusion, the City-State of the future could bring nothing less than another Renaissance to the world with new Age of Enlightenment with power of connecting people on a variety of brand new levels.
Image refs:
* https://hazza42.deviantart.com/art/City-Planet-267257518
** http://assassinscreed.wikia.com/wiki/File:AC2_florence_concept.jpg
*** https://visibleearth.nasa.gov/view.php?id=55167
Refs:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venetian_independence_referendum,_2014
http://www.intellinews.com/serbian-government-takes-over-nis-airport-139387/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renaissance
https://aeon.co/essays/the-end-of-a-world-of-nation-states-may-be-upon-us
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2017/06/as-nation-states-falter-cities-are-stepping-up/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City-state
https://www.history.com/topics/enlightenment
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/10/forget-the-nation-state
http://www.un.org/en/development/desa/population/publications/pdf/urbanization/
Artistic City Planet by Hazza42*
If you ask me, Sisyphus, a cruel king of Corinth who was condemned forever to roll a huge stone up a hill in Hades would have better chance to place his boulder on the top than we to cancel all countries worldwide and give the cities well deserved independence. Nevertheless, let's see, in one mind experiment, if we hypothetically had today such social organisation of the world, how the life would be different. What would we gain and what would we loose in our way of living?
But before diving into more details about how planetary society could work with cities instead of countries perhaps we could check a little history. Contrary to what we might expect to learn about history of governmental polity and even though we are taking countries and borders for granted today, in the past sovereignty over a defined space wasn't strict at all. Countries as we know them started to be a social organisation around millennium before today but in the essence, before industrialization took place in early 19th century their existence and jurisdiction were much different. Before that point in history countries existed in realm of several big empires which were constantly colonizing smaller nations who on the other end were in constant fight over unclaimed land or neighboring territory. Big empires along with remnants of city-states from the renaissance and number of small principalities and provinces, many populated with people of same nationalities, were constructed with centers of power that were still in big fortified capital cities surrounding their royal palaces. During all those times before industrialization up to the middle of 19th century, borders were pretty loose term that travelers crossed without any checkpoints or passports of any kind.
'Duomo' Florence, portrayed in Assassin's Creed**
History also had a good record of City-States, especially during the Renaissance period and it worked extremely well. Many cities across the Italian Peninsula, Mediterranean and Adriatic seas preserved their independence and flourished in almost every aspect of humanity. Milan, Venice, Rome, Turin, Naples, Ragusa and my favorite Florence was well-known examples from the late middle-age prosperity, especially in art and science. Even today, the spirit of the old days still lives in the very core of many Italian cities and in latest years the main example were Venetian online independence and autonomy referendums. They were unofficial in nature with their results being fully non-binding but in a nutshell, many residents of Veneto were and still are annoyed for the city paying enormous taxes to the Nation-State every year while in return they always receive less than given. The story goes even further in the realm of power and business and there are 'showcases' everywhere. For example the city of Niš in Serbia, where I live, was recently forced to give away its airport to the Nation-State to govern following a poor business deal between the national government and the owner of the airport in national capital which, believe it or not, limits the number of passengers and therefore further development of smaller nearby airports.
These two examples are just a tiny point of the iceberg in political absurdity of the relations between nation states and their cities. In hypothetical planetary cancellation of Nation-States and country borders even more ridiculous and superfluous affairs would follow and ceased to exist over time. If we exclude nullifying preposterous and vague speeches we heard every now and again, like those spoken by almost all politicians on power throughout the globe that "our nation is the greatest nation" or "our devotion to defend our nation is out of question", the real benefit would be in cancellation of enormous taxes for military budgets. No doubt, armed forces would not cease to exist but their move from national government hats into city halls would radically reduce the so called GFP or Global Firepower which in almost all countries took up to three quarters of national budget every year. If you are eager to know how big that numbers actually are I did some research in one of previous posts related to military named "Warfare Then and Now". I am not going into any debate how future warfare would look like in the world without borders but even if we found some logic in, for example, constant presence of Russian and American military forces in foreign countries such as Syria in recent years, it would be very far from common sense that in hypothetical City-State world, for example, cities of Seattle or Vladivostok would find any reason to send their armed forces onto Damascus streets. I really think that the most of the cities of the future would start minding their own business for the benefit of all the others. At least when GFP numbers are in question.
Earth’s city lights, Visible Earth catalog***
Furthermore, the potential of City-States networking outside of national borders is something countries cannot provide. The social policy within city walls could become more powerful and more effective. The big cities could also take care of their smaller neighbors more efficiently favoring production of domestic goods instead of hazardous imports of, for example, food over long distances. Traveling without unnecessary passport controls would be amazingly enjoyable and easy with technology providing invisible security controls on more checkpoints than just on airports, harbors or railway and road tolls without custom control at all. Yes, we would probably loose the joy of national competitions in sports but this would not be the real disadvantage, I am sure in one way or another the sport would survive and club competitions would take over with possible slightly modified Olympic games.
21st century and its further globalization primarily in the face of almighty internet is projecting completely new social environment for the future. Internet control is a battle that cannot be won even by using sophisticated surveillance or simple pulling the plugs out. Nor by introducing any national laws made in order to shape data control over the network. Similarly, according to UN, more than 50% of entire world population live now in cities and global migration toward urban settlements continues inevitably toward 60% at the end of next decade. For this trend being unstoppable as it seems, the network of cities of the future is something that will have the power to overcome the old ways. The outcome of the future countries that would become inefficient is inevitable and possibly even dangerous for further evolution of humanity and its survival. On the other hand, in a short conclusion, the City-State of the future could bring nothing less than another Renaissance to the world with new Age of Enlightenment with power of connecting people on a variety of brand new levels.
Image refs:
* https://hazza42.deviantart.com/art/City-Planet-267257518
** http://assassinscreed.wikia.com/wiki/File:AC2_florence_concept.jpg
*** https://visibleearth.nasa.gov/view.php?id=55167
Refs:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venetian_independence_referendum,_2014
http://www.intellinews.com/serbian-government-takes-over-nis-airport-139387/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renaissance
https://aeon.co/essays/the-end-of-a-world-of-nation-states-may-be-upon-us
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2017/06/as-nation-states-falter-cities-are-stepping-up/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City-state
https://www.history.com/topics/enlightenment
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/10/forget-the-nation-state
http://www.un.org/en/development/desa/population/publications/pdf/urbanization/
My first encounter with Intelligence Quotient, aka IQ, was 25 years ago during my preliminary exam for the mandatory military service. In those years Serbia was part of a former socialist federation of Yugoslavia along with couple of more countries and avoiding army service was impossible. Everybody had to go to serve the "time" for one whole year and they used those preliminary tests to better fit you into suitable unit and doing a form of an IQ test was part of it. They didn't give us the result, but I probably did it pretty well since they put me to be main operator of a ground-to-ground missile unit. At least my little bit higher intelligence than average "soldier" spared me from the mud, dirt, long marches, carrying heavy weaponry and other meaningless activities of the service. So I spent most of the time in a classroom surrounded with state of the art simulators, playing video games made specially for practicing real time guidance of the missile in simula
My first encounter with Intelligence Quotient, aka IQ, was 25 years ago during my preliminary exam for the mandatory military service. In those years Serbia was part of a former socialist federation of Yugoslavia along with couple of more countries and avoiding army service was impossible. Everybody had to go to serve the "time" for one whole year and they used those preliminary tests to better fit you into suitable unit and doing a form of an IQ test was part of it. They didn't give us the result, but I probably did it pretty well since they put me to be main operator of a ground-to-ground missile unit. At least my little bit higher intelligence than average "soldier" spared me from the mud, dirt, long marches, carrying heavy weaponry and other meaningless activities of the service. So I spent most of the time in a classroom surrounded with state of the art simulators, playing video games made specially for practicing real time guidance of the missile in simulated environments. The little rocket itself was too expensive so we never fired the real one, so more or less, even-though I would never participate the military if I was asked, my "time" passed smoothly and surprisingly enjoyable as I made couple of good friendships there.
When I started writing the blog one of my first post was the famous short story by Isaac Asimov called "What Is Intelligence, Anyway?". When I first read it, I remember my initial reaction was that it's exactly how I feel about the topic and not just the intelligence itself, it's more about Asimov's writing style. Don't tell anybody, but this was my first inspiration for my blog. It was a short story initiated with his life and yet embedded with a strong message and also informative and funny. Great man Isaac. One of my role models and surely one of greatest writers of all times. Please read it after reading this post as it will be the conclusion of the main IQ story. However, like Asimov, I have my reservations regarding measuring IQ, simply because I am not sure how accurate these tests are. There are lots of them on the net, the ones on Mensa sites and those improved by more textual questions and tasks so I selected several tests online and scored every time different result - with approximate number in the realm of still undiscovered element (Uqb'). The score variation could be caused by part of the day I took the exams, amount of concentration and distraction I had, etc.
I remember one of the famous quotation of sir Conan Doyle's Sherlock Holmes, from the original series played by Jeremy Brett - he said that his mind operates the best in the morning whit empty stomach in a dark silent room (sometimes enhanced with some sort of certain chemicals). But in a nutshell it is individual routine, some people, and I know couple of them, operate the best if a radio is playing in the background, some are more stressed than the others if the test is performed in the class room filled with other participants. Some, like me, operate better without time limitations or deadlines. So I have a feeling, if it is possible, that intelligence must be measured differently, like how person reacts in different real situations that require intelligent thinking, in other words the test must be defined to be a bit more than just answering a questions on a piece of paper. However and nevertheless, the actual IQ measurement is able to provide pretty accurate picture of person's intellect. On the other end or better say from the DNA point of view intelligence is comparable to any other human genetic feature. Some people are tall some short, some are blond, others are brunette, some are strong and muscular, some are thin and skinny, people also can be born hetero or homo sexual, some can't eat meat without vomiting, others can't live without pork or lamb on a weekly menu. The same is with little gray cells and while we are perfectly able to use measuring meter in order to find out how tall we are, the only valuable instrument to measure how smart we are is the IQ test. Co-founder of the DNA molecule, James D. Watson once said that we should think of the human intelligence as a feature if it's high or a disease if it is low. I am paraphrasing his words now but he said this while watching a post-graduates receiving their degrees referring to those with low IQs: "It may not be their fault that they aren't clever, their genetic code may limit their capacity to dazzle - think of it as a genetic disease and one day we will find cure for that."
Keeping in mind that IQ is just a measurement of our intelligence, even if there is a public criticism among scientific circles, the question is - are we able to maintain it? Can it be improved by exercises or special diets? Many say yes and I agree fully. However, it's not completely clear or defined what intelligence really is, whether it is just a way how our brain operates with internal memory or there is something alternative to modern CPUs in our heads that with different people comes with different performance. Either way, it is possible to at least maintain the IQ by solving puzzles from time to time, keeping your brain busy by daily watching, reading and thinking about various topics and adjust your diet according to your organism and its expectations keeping it satisfied by digesting the food and drinks it is comfortable with. I know it is vague, but this is simple true, nobody knows your body better than you, so try to listen its needs more than your friend's advice. Nutritional advice by professional could also come handy and helpful as well as reading and exploring the scientific articles and experiences.
One particular study comes to my mind - I recently stumbled on Science Daily article reporting a study performed by Prof. Mark Weiser of Tel Aviv University's Department of Psychiatry. In the study, conducted with 20,000 Israeli Army recruits and veterans, the average IQ for a non-smoker was about 101, while the smokers' average was more than seven IQ points lower at about 94, and the IQs of young men who smoked more than a pack a day were lower still, at about 90. So there you go, numbers don't lie. I am sure armies all over the world will never ban smoking in their facilities. It would be wrong for the moral and it could make soldiers to start thinking. Scary. Literally. Satirically.
Criticism aside, IQ tests are today standardized and carried by organizations like Mensa International providing good monitoring of IQ trends among countries, social groups, races, genders, etc. It also gives us data about IQ trend worldwide. What would you think where it is going? Are we going to be smarter or dumber in the future? According to Fourmilab Switzerland and their article named Global IQ: 1950-2050, the mean population IQ is completely opposite to the population growing chart. The mean population IQ dropped for 5 points from the year of 1950 to predicted IQ in the year of 2050. It seams that we are getting down with our social IQ year after year. No wonder why reality TV shows like "Big Brother" are more popular than adventure movies or scientific documentaries.
If I would like to show you the funny side of the dropping IQ trends I would only advise you to watch first couple of minutes of the movie "Idiocracy". Famous narrated introduction of the movie goes like this: "Evolution does not necessarily reward intelligence. With no natural predators to thin the herd, it began to simply reward those who reproduced the most and left the intelligent to become an endangered species." Here is the first part of the intro I found on FoxConnect channel, it's hilarious:
How this 'competition' ended watch in the next part of FoxConnect YouTube channel here: http://youtu.be/vfHCuFqdl3Q. It also reminded me to the TV Shows "Cheers" aired decades ago. In one of the episodes there is a funny explanation of evolution called Cliff Clavin's Theory of Beer. It goes like this: "A herd of buffalo can only move as fast as the slowest buffalo. When the herd is hunted, the slow and weak at the back are killed first. The speed and health of the herd keeps improving by the regular killing of the weakest members. In the same way, the human brain can only operate as fast as its slowest brain cells. Excessive intake of alcohol, as we know, kills brain cells. Naturally, it attacks the slowest and weakest brain cells first. In this way, regular consumption of beer eliminates the weaker brain cells, making the brain a faster and more efficient machine. That's why you always feel smarter after a few beers."
Original post date: April 2012, Updates: June 2016, May 2018
Image refs:
http://extrawall.net/?option=wallpaper&id=244#.V2BK8vl9600
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/the-two-scariest-charts-in-the-world-today
Uqb'
http://periodicsystem.org/unquadbium
*Neuroscientists Find That Status within Groups Can Affect IQ
http://www.caltech.edu/content/neuroscientists-find-status-within-groups-can-affect-iq
**Tony Buzan's 2005 genius tabulation
http://www.eoht.info/page/IQ+tables
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Aries_no_Mur#cite_note-GS-1
Smoking and IQ
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/04/100401151746.htm
Global IQ: 1950–2050
http://www.fourmilab.ch/documents/IQ/1950-2050/
Are we becoming more stupid? Human brain has been 'shrinking for the last 20,000 years'
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1343093/Human-brain-shrinking-20-000-years.html
IQ Alarm Clock: Firing Up Your Brain to Life Every Morning
http://inventorspot.com/articles/iq_alarm_clock_tune_your_brain
IQ xAlarm
http://www.androidzoom.com/android_applications/tools/iq-xalarm_ihib.html
Isaac Asimov
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isaac_Asimov
Mensa International
http://www.mensa.org/
While IQ is generally thought to be innate, there are things you can do that may improve your IQ score.
http://www.pickthebrain.com/blog/5-simple-ways-to-make-the-most-of-your-intelligence/
http://www.mindsparke.com/increase_iq.php
http://www.squidoo.com/raise-your-iq
When I started writing the blog one of my first post was the famous short story by Isaac Asimov called "What Is Intelligence, Anyway?". When I first read it, I remember my initial reaction was that it's exactly how I feel about the topic and not just the intelligence itself, it's more about Asimov's writing style. Don't tell anybody, but this was my first inspiration for my blog. It was a short story initiated with his life and yet embedded with a strong message and also informative and funny. Great man Isaac. One of my role models and surely one of greatest writers of all times. Please read it after reading this post as it will be the conclusion of the main IQ story. However, like Asimov, I have my reservations regarding measuring IQ, simply because I am not sure how accurate these tests are. There are lots of them on the net, the ones on Mensa sites and those improved by more textual questions and tasks so I selected several tests online and scored every time different result - with approximate number in the realm of still undiscovered element (Uqb'). The score variation could be caused by part of the day I took the exams, amount of concentration and distraction I had, etc.
I remember one of the famous quotation of sir Conan Doyle's Sherlock Holmes, from the original series played by Jeremy Brett - he said that his mind operates the best in the morning whit empty stomach in a dark silent room (sometimes enhanced with some sort of certain chemicals). But in a nutshell it is individual routine, some people, and I know couple of them, operate the best if a radio is playing in the background, some are more stressed than the others if the test is performed in the class room filled with other participants. Some, like me, operate better without time limitations or deadlines. So I have a feeling, if it is possible, that intelligence must be measured differently, like how person reacts in different real situations that require intelligent thinking, in other words the test must be defined to be a bit more than just answering a questions on a piece of paper. However and nevertheless, the actual IQ measurement is able to provide pretty accurate picture of person's intellect. On the other end or better say from the DNA point of view intelligence is comparable to any other human genetic feature. Some people are tall some short, some are blond, others are brunette, some are strong and muscular, some are thin and skinny, people also can be born hetero or homo sexual, some can't eat meat without vomiting, others can't live without pork or lamb on a weekly menu. The same is with little gray cells and while we are perfectly able to use measuring meter in order to find out how tall we are, the only valuable instrument to measure how smart we are is the IQ test. Co-founder of the DNA molecule, James D. Watson once said that we should think of the human intelligence as a feature if it's high or a disease if it is low. I am paraphrasing his words now but he said this while watching a post-graduates receiving their degrees referring to those with low IQs: "It may not be their fault that they aren't clever, their genetic code may limit their capacity to dazzle - think of it as a genetic disease and one day we will find cure for that."
Leonardo is estimated with the highest IQ of 220**
Keeping in mind that IQ is just a measurement of our intelligence, even if there is a public criticism among scientific circles, the question is - are we able to maintain it? Can it be improved by exercises or special diets? Many say yes and I agree fully. However, it's not completely clear or defined what intelligence really is, whether it is just a way how our brain operates with internal memory or there is something alternative to modern CPUs in our heads that with different people comes with different performance. Either way, it is possible to at least maintain the IQ by solving puzzles from time to time, keeping your brain busy by daily watching, reading and thinking about various topics and adjust your diet according to your organism and its expectations keeping it satisfied by digesting the food and drinks it is comfortable with. I know it is vague, but this is simple true, nobody knows your body better than you, so try to listen its needs more than your friend's advice. Nutritional advice by professional could also come handy and helpful as well as reading and exploring the scientific articles and experiences.
One particular study comes to my mind - I recently stumbled on Science Daily article reporting a study performed by Prof. Mark Weiser of Tel Aviv University's Department of Psychiatry. In the study, conducted with 20,000 Israeli Army recruits and veterans, the average IQ for a non-smoker was about 101, while the smokers' average was more than seven IQ points lower at about 94, and the IQs of young men who smoked more than a pack a day were lower still, at about 90. So there you go, numbers don't lie. I am sure armies all over the world will never ban smoking in their facilities. It would be wrong for the moral and it could make soldiers to start thinking. Scary. Literally. Satirically.
Mean IQ and World IQ level prediction
Criticism aside, IQ tests are today standardized and carried by organizations like Mensa International providing good monitoring of IQ trends among countries, social groups, races, genders, etc. It also gives us data about IQ trend worldwide. What would you think where it is going? Are we going to be smarter or dumber in the future? According to Fourmilab Switzerland and their article named Global IQ: 1950-2050, the mean population IQ is completely opposite to the population growing chart. The mean population IQ dropped for 5 points from the year of 1950 to predicted IQ in the year of 2050. It seams that we are getting down with our social IQ year after year. No wonder why reality TV shows like "Big Brother" are more popular than adventure movies or scientific documentaries.
If I would like to show you the funny side of the dropping IQ trends I would only advise you to watch first couple of minutes of the movie "Idiocracy". Famous narrated introduction of the movie goes like this: "Evolution does not necessarily reward intelligence. With no natural predators to thin the herd, it began to simply reward those who reproduced the most and left the intelligent to become an endangered species." Here is the first part of the intro I found on FoxConnect channel, it's hilarious:
How this 'competition' ended watch in the next part of FoxConnect YouTube channel here: http://youtu.be/vfHCuFqdl3Q. It also reminded me to the TV Shows "Cheers" aired decades ago. In one of the episodes there is a funny explanation of evolution called Cliff Clavin's Theory of Beer. It goes like this: "A herd of buffalo can only move as fast as the slowest buffalo. When the herd is hunted, the slow and weak at the back are killed first. The speed and health of the herd keeps improving by the regular killing of the weakest members. In the same way, the human brain can only operate as fast as its slowest brain cells. Excessive intake of alcohol, as we know, kills brain cells. Naturally, it attacks the slowest and weakest brain cells first. In this way, regular consumption of beer eliminates the weaker brain cells, making the brain a faster and more efficient machine. That's why you always feel smarter after a few beers."
Original post date: April 2012, Updates: June 2016, May 2018
Image refs:
http://extrawall.net/?option=wallpaper&id=244#.V2BK8vl9600
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/the-two-scariest-charts-in-the-world-today
Uqb'
http://periodicsystem.org/unquadbium
*Neuroscientists Find That Status within Groups Can Affect IQ
http://www.caltech.edu/content/neuroscientists-find-status-within-groups-can-affect-iq
**Tony Buzan's 2005 genius tabulation
http://www.eoht.info/page/IQ+tables
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Aries_no_Mur#cite_note-GS-1
Smoking and IQ
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/04/100401151746.htm
Global IQ: 1950–2050
http://www.fourmilab.ch/documents/IQ/1950-2050/
Are we becoming more stupid? Human brain has been 'shrinking for the last 20,000 years'
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1343093/Human-brain-shrinking-20-000-years.html
IQ Alarm Clock: Firing Up Your Brain to Life Every Morning
http://inventorspot.com/articles/iq_alarm_clock_tune_your_brain
IQ xAlarm
http://www.androidzoom.com/android_applications/tools/iq-xalarm_ihib.html
Isaac Asimov
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isaac_Asimov
Mensa International
http://www.mensa.org/
While IQ is generally thought to be innate, there are things you can do that may improve your IQ score.
http://www.pickthebrain.com/blog/5-simple-ways-to-make-the-most-of-your-intelligence/
http://www.mindsparke.com/increase_iq.php
http://www.squidoo.com/raise-your-iq
Lately I was watching current stream of war related news and Syrian migrant crisis and I thought of what would I say on the blog about actual, continuous and devastating warfare in Europe, Africa and Middle East and stupidity of literally inexplicable background of who is fighting whom in all those conflicts and what cause would justify the aftermaths in form of devastated cities and long refugee-columns... Or even what words should I use to describe foolishness of the new cold war between nuclear powered "super countries" and what that will mean for our children and theirs in the future... Then I realized that reacting to meaningless affairs and worldwide political absurdity in a world so divided by racial, structural, governmental and religious diversity is also meaningless. I also realized that I said enough in the past. There is nothing new to be added or said. There will always be people who will think that rifle is not a rifle if it never fires a bullet. And to use a
Lately I was watching current stream of war related news and Syrian migrant crisis and I thought of what would I say on the blog about actual, continuous and devastating warfare in Europe, Africa and Middle East and stupidity of literally inexplicable background of who is fighting whom in all those conflicts and what cause would justify the aftermaths in form of devastated cities and long refugee-columns... Or even what words should I use to describe foolishness of the new cold war between nuclear powered "super countries" and what that will mean for our children and theirs in the future... Then I realized that reacting to meaningless affairs and worldwide political absurdity in a world so divided by racial, structural, governmental and religious diversity is also meaningless. I also realized that I said enough in the past. There is nothing new to be added or said. There will always be people who will think that rifle is not a rifle if it never fires a bullet.
And to use a rifle you need war, right?
I have to admit that I have mixed fillings when it comes to military, soldiers, wars, battles, tactics, military gadgets and stuff. On the 'interesting' side of the medal, warfare, if placed in history, good stories or movies are simply extraordinary tales and I love them. Perhaps, in a way it was also based on my experience as a soldier - I served the army more than two decades ago within the mandatory military service and I was situated in the surface-to-surface missile unit and trained for operating small rockets designed for targeting tanks and other heavy machinery. I couldn't say I enjoyed all the time spent in the service but I wouldn't be telling the true if I'd say that it wasn't interesting and educational, at least from the technical point of view.
Speaking of history and tales, this summer, I mentioned one of the most famous last stands in the history of wars in post "Fishermen and Pirates of Evia" when king Leonidas of Sparta confronted large army of Persian Empire and stood to the very end guarding narrow pass in the battle of Thermopylae almost 2500 years ago. Anyhow, here, in Serbia, in our own history, we also have one of those suicide missions, conveniently called "last stands" by military vocabulary and it happened only couple of kilometers on the north from our house on the nearby hill called Čegar. Just like Leonidas, Serbian general Stevan Sindjelić, during the First Serbian Uprising against Ottoman Empire in the year of 1809, confronted huge Ottoman offensive after Serbian army failed to capture main Turkish fortress in the city. Outnumbered by 1 to 10 Serbian trench only managed to reject several attacks and after almost all day long of fighting the battle turned to be one of the best known last stands in long history of Ottoman occupation of Serbian lands. Ultimately, when battle turned to be hand-to-hand combat in the trench, Stevan fired his flintlock pistol into a pile of gunpowder kegs in the moment when ottoman soldiers swarmed the trench from all sides and headed for him personally. Explosion was tremendous and the fall of Stevan's trench created time for other Serbian troops in remaining 5 trenches to retreat on time and, in the aftermath, Turks took all the Serbian soldiers' heads off and used the skulls to build a tower along the road to Constantinople, as a warning to anyone rising against the Ottoman Empire.
Yesterday, we decided to visit the hill where it all happened and took some photos with two remaining cannons from the battle and from the monumental tower standing in the middle of the field. It was one of the kind experience that leaves distressed filling, especially after the glimpse from the top of the narrow tower toward the planes and the city.
But there is another side of my mixed fillings regarding this topic. Simply put, if you place the warfare outside the history or fiction, and experience it live, for me, all the magic from movies and books is evaporating into thin air almost immediately. While I wasn't participating any warfare in the army, I have witnessed real air strikes performed by NATO aircraft, dropping cluster bombs just hundred's of meters away from my house. I saw them explode*. I saw real damage in neighboring houses and streets and saw people injured from the impacts. Real people. Not soldiers. Collateral victims. Civilians. It wasn't fun. It seems that warfare two centuries before were more dignified, to say the least. The battles before were "organized" outside settlements and most of them took place in the fields where no civilian casualties could be possible. Today, if you look the aftermath of any wars happening everywhere on the globe, first thing you will notice are devastated cities, villages, houses, schools, hospitals even... Murdered innocent people and children. Ruins in all directions. It is easy today to pull the trigger. From the distance. There are no real heroes or knights today like before.
Modern times and technological advances perhaps ruined the very essence of war, but deeply in it's core, the war was, is and will always stay our darkest invention. Yes, it looks amazing with special effects in movies and written in our history books full of heroes and heroic events but in the nutshell it represents the worst genes we kept from our animal ancestors, evolutionary speaking.
And the armies... They are big part of it. Following words, said couple of years before the battle of Čegar, on a different continent, are still fresh and valid, just like if they were said yesterday. Almost certainly, the famous James Madison's quote will stay accurate for many more centuries. After all, as a species, humans are not really capable of learning from their own mistakes:
I am sure proving his point is as easy as glimpsing the yearly statistics for the Global Firepower, aka GFP. Following numbers I acquired from "Business Insider" and "The Center for Arms Control & Non-Proliferation". They are collected for the latest year and I summarized the data for only top 5 armies in the world - US, Russia, China, India and UK (and you can freely double these numbers for accounts of all other countries).
Anyway, more or less, give or take, believe it or not, in the nutshell, GFP numbers are:
And don't forget to add uncountable and I really mean devastating large number of missiles and rockets, all kind of ballistics, regular weapons, drones, rifles, pistols, cold weapons, military based factories, scientific research facilities, spy satellites and military space programs, state of the art uniforms etc. Indeed we don't have name for that big number in mathematics. Even the number of zeros in that count would be probably longer than the letters in this very sentence.
Now, only by comparing these numbers with James Madison's words, it seems that after 200+ years, perhaps armies are not children of war anymore. In the dawn of third millennium it seems now that they are perfectly capable of creating wars just to justify their own existence. If only war could stay in history and fairy tales... But we all know that's not going to happen. With all those weaponry in existence there will always be people who will think that rifle is not a rifle if it never fires a bullet.
Original post date: November 2014, Update: November 2015
Image ref:
**http://www.businessinsider.com/11-most-powerful-militaries-in-the-world-2014-4
Refs:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Čegar
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skull_Tower
http://armscontrolcenter.org/
http://www.globalissues.org/article/75/world-military-spending
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_states_with_nuclear_weapons
http://armscontrolcenter.org/issues/nuclearweapons/articles/fact_sheet_2014
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Madison
http://www.businessinsider.com/35-most-powerful-militaries-in-the-world-2014-7
* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cluster_bombing_of_Niš
And to use a rifle you need war, right?
I have to admit that I have mixed fillings when it comes to military, soldiers, wars, battles, tactics, military gadgets and stuff. On the 'interesting' side of the medal, warfare, if placed in history, good stories or movies are simply extraordinary tales and I love them. Perhaps, in a way it was also based on my experience as a soldier - I served the army more than two decades ago within the mandatory military service and I was situated in the surface-to-surface missile unit and trained for operating small rockets designed for targeting tanks and other heavy machinery. I couldn't say I enjoyed all the time spent in the service but I wouldn't be telling the true if I'd say that it wasn't interesting and educational, at least from the technical point of view.
The cannon from the Hill of Čegar
Speaking of history and tales, this summer, I mentioned one of the most famous last stands in the history of wars in post "Fishermen and Pirates of Evia" when king Leonidas of Sparta confronted large army of Persian Empire and stood to the very end guarding narrow pass in the battle of Thermopylae almost 2500 years ago. Anyhow, here, in Serbia, in our own history, we also have one of those suicide missions, conveniently called "last stands" by military vocabulary and it happened only couple of kilometers on the north from our house on the nearby hill called Čegar. Just like Leonidas, Serbian general Stevan Sindjelić, during the First Serbian Uprising against Ottoman Empire in the year of 1809, confronted huge Ottoman offensive after Serbian army failed to capture main Turkish fortress in the city. Outnumbered by 1 to 10 Serbian trench only managed to reject several attacks and after almost all day long of fighting the battle turned to be one of the best known last stands in long history of Ottoman occupation of Serbian lands. Ultimately, when battle turned to be hand-to-hand combat in the trench, Stevan fired his flintlock pistol into a pile of gunpowder kegs in the moment when ottoman soldiers swarmed the trench from all sides and headed for him personally. Explosion was tremendous and the fall of Stevan's trench created time for other Serbian troops in remaining 5 trenches to retreat on time and, in the aftermath, Turks took all the Serbian soldiers' heads off and used the skulls to build a tower along the road to Constantinople, as a warning to anyone rising against the Ottoman Empire.
Yesterday, we decided to visit the hill where it all happened and took some photos with two remaining cannons from the battle and from the monumental tower standing in the middle of the field. It was one of the kind experience that leaves distressed filling, especially after the glimpse from the top of the narrow tower toward the planes and the city.
Stevan Sindjelić & Remains of the Skull Tower in Niš
But there is another side of my mixed fillings regarding this topic. Simply put, if you place the warfare outside the history or fiction, and experience it live, for me, all the magic from movies and books is evaporating into thin air almost immediately. While I wasn't participating any warfare in the army, I have witnessed real air strikes performed by NATO aircraft, dropping cluster bombs just hundred's of meters away from my house. I saw them explode*. I saw real damage in neighboring houses and streets and saw people injured from the impacts. Real people. Not soldiers. Collateral victims. Civilians. It wasn't fun. It seems that warfare two centuries before were more dignified, to say the least. The battles before were "organized" outside settlements and most of them took place in the fields where no civilian casualties could be possible. Today, if you look the aftermath of any wars happening everywhere on the globe, first thing you will notice are devastated cities, villages, houses, schools, hospitals even... Murdered innocent people and children. Ruins in all directions. It is easy today to pull the trigger. From the distance. There are no real heroes or knights today like before.
Modern times and technological advances perhaps ruined the very essence of war, but deeply in it's core, the war was, is and will always stay our darkest invention. Yes, it looks amazing with special effects in movies and written in our history books full of heroes and heroic events but in the nutshell it represents the worst genes we kept from our animal ancestors, evolutionary speaking.
View from Čegar's monumental tower with Viktor's plastic AK-47 toy gun
And the armies... They are big part of it. Following words, said couple of years before the battle of Čegar, on a different continent, are still fresh and valid, just like if they were said yesterday. Almost certainly, the famous James Madison's quote will stay accurate for many more centuries. After all, as a species, humans are not really capable of learning from their own mistakes:
"Of all the enemies to public liberty war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes … known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few.… No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare." - James Madison, Political Observations, 1795
I am sure proving his point is as easy as glimpsing the yearly statistics for the Global Firepower, aka GFP. Following numbers I acquired from "Business Insider" and "The Center for Arms Control & Non-Proliferation". They are collected for the latest year and I summarized the data for only top 5 armies in the world - US, Russia, China, India and UK (and you can freely double these numbers for accounts of all other countries).
Anyway, more or less, give or take, believe it or not, in the nutshell, GFP numbers are:
6.000.000+ soldiers (human beings, men in the uniform)
35.000+ tanks (the iron amfibia combat vehicles with a heavy guns on the top)
22.000+ aircraft (fighters, bombers, logistic planes, all kinds of military flying machines)
16.000+ nuclear warheads (only couple of them needed to cease all life on earth)
1000+ warships (cruisers, destroyers, frigates, corvettes, etc.)
15+ aircraft carriers (monster nuclear powered ships)
230+ combat submarines (with large nuclear engines under the sea)
900.000.000.000+ dollars spent for military budgets (per year)
35.000+ tanks (the iron amfibia combat vehicles with a heavy guns on the top)
22.000+ aircraft (fighters, bombers, logistic planes, all kinds of military flying machines)
16.000+ nuclear warheads (only couple of them needed to cease all life on earth)
1000+ warships (cruisers, destroyers, frigates, corvettes, etc.)
15+ aircraft carriers (monster nuclear powered ships)
230+ combat submarines (with large nuclear engines under the sea)
900.000.000.000+ dollars spent for military budgets (per year)
And don't forget to add uncountable and I really mean devastating large number of missiles and rockets, all kind of ballistics, regular weapons, drones, rifles, pistols, cold weapons, military based factories, scientific research facilities, spy satellites and military space programs, state of the art uniforms etc. Indeed we don't have name for that big number in mathematics. Even the number of zeros in that count would be probably longer than the letters in this very sentence.
The 11 Most Powerful Militaries In The World**
Now, only by comparing these numbers with James Madison's words, it seems that after 200+ years, perhaps armies are not children of war anymore. In the dawn of third millennium it seems now that they are perfectly capable of creating wars just to justify their own existence. If only war could stay in history and fairy tales... But we all know that's not going to happen. With all those weaponry in existence there will always be people who will think that rifle is not a rifle if it never fires a bullet.
Original post date: November 2014, Update: November 2015
Image ref:
**http://www.businessinsider.com/11-most-powerful-militaries-in-the-world-2014-4
Refs:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Čegar
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skull_Tower
http://armscontrolcenter.org/
http://www.globalissues.org/article/75/world-military-spending
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_states_with_nuclear_weapons
http://armscontrolcenter.org/issues/nuclearweapons/articles/fact_sheet_2014
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Madison
http://www.businessinsider.com/35-most-powerful-militaries-in-the-world-2014-7
* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cluster_bombing_of_Niš
I have a small challenge for you in a form of a quick quiz question: You must use just one word in order to describe following paragraph: "You sleep in small rooms with other people usually on bank-beds and everyday you must get up and be out of bed exactly at 5 hundred hours and go outside to do physical exercises where you are usually forced to sing songs with no significant meanings. Three times a day you wait in line in order to eat or you don't get any food. You have to wear the same clothing like all others, take weekly showers in large mutual bathrooms and in other parts of the day you have to work on assigned jobs or learn how to survive fight with other people similar to you." I don't know but I've been told So what is it? I am sure there are several words with different meanings that easily fits the description but in relation to what I am going to write in this post the chosen word is: The Army. In this particular case, there is no room for a
I have a small challenge for you in a form of a quick quiz question: You must use just one word in order to describe following paragraph:
"You sleep in small rooms with other people usually on bank-beds and everyday you must get up and be out of bed exactly at 5 hundred hours and go outside to do physical exercises where you are usually forced to sing songs with no significant meanings. Three times a day you wait in line in order to eat or you don't get any food. You have to wear the same clothing like all others, take weekly showers in large mutual bathrooms and in other parts of the day you have to work on assigned jobs or learn how to survive fight with other people similar to you."
So what is it? I am sure there are several words with different meanings that easily fits the description but in relation to what I am going to write in this post the chosen word is: The Army. In this particular case, there is no room for accidental similarity with other words you might use. Simply, military service is created to be cruel where you must fit your position without thinking. There is no democracy here, you either obey orders or you are out. Along with others you have mutual name - The Troops. There is no individuality here other than your number on a metal plate you wear under the uniform. I have to add that I am not targeting any particular military service in this post, just wanted to write generally about worldwide armies in relation to what it means to our pure survival on this planet. I will also try not to sound pathetic and cry for Lennon's kind of slogans like "make love, not war" and stand an equally non-sensed and opposite position of the stick.
Instead, let's speak throughout the facts of a cruel world order as it is today as a result of couple of millenniums of human rapid evolution creamed with different religiosity, various animosities, cultural differences and different level of development monitoring in technology superior time comparing to previous centuries. If we look all our mutual aggressiveness and violent history the question is why aren't we doomed and wiped out with our own differences already? The answer is simple really and this is maybe predicted by Nikola Tesla long ago. Today the leading countries are in possession of a technology to hit a target as small as square meter from a distance measurable by hundreds of kilometers. Tesla once had this obsession of making a long distance weapon based on a electrical energy flashing throughout air capable of destroying the enemy located on different continent. He said that when all armies got in possession of such weapon any war would become meaningless as there would be no winner, only two losers and collateral damages in between.
Nowadays, with all currently existing military technology, it looks like we are heading toward the planetary society like in this Tesla's vision. But, we are not there yet, surely there are more technology superior countries today than in the middle of previous century who polarized the world in a so called "Cold War", but still the same dangerous animosities of the past are still there. I remember when I listened a podcast about a book "The Omega Scroll" in the interview with author Adrian d'Hagé, former Australian brigadier and security officer. He shared his thoughts about current situations in the world of the time after 9/11 event and the open war against recognized terrorists in relation of religious dogma. Both sides often used a sentence "in the name of the god" while their active military campaigns performed outside their main countries or habitat if you will. Adrian d'Hagé is now a novelist and author of great adventurous novels in regards to military threats especially in terrorism and bioterrorism and I loved his glimpse on religious property of all violent "encounters" between Christianity, Islam and Judaism. These three religions seem to be the the major cause of all big warfare and conflicts in past two millenniums. Ironically, their dogmatic religious beliefs are connected to the same divine super being and the world would definitively be the better place if history of world's three major religions was more peaceful back then when it all started.
But to get back from the cause to the effect, worldwide armies nowadays are pretty different, depending on country, ideology and long term goals. Some of them depends on the state of the art armory and up to the date electronics in all aspects of military units with professionals hired and paid for their services just like in any other regular jobs while others depend on participating all people within their mandatory active service and also as in reserve or veteran units.
Also, some armies are trained for any kind of war everywhere on the planet while others specialize in their own territories only. Regardless of all the differences one thing is very much common for all worldwide armies. With small exceptions they all share the largest budget cuts comparing to all other annual expenses in their countries. Globally military spending on weapons are measurable by almost 2 trillion of US dollars. The more transparent numbers you can find on the net is about budget spending in USA where last year they spent $317 billions compared to only $12.8 for NASA. More or less the same story is everywhere else. Nobody is questioning the numbers though but every now and again I hear the same justification where people state importance of military research and inventions that first appeared or invented for army purposes and then spread to the civilians like airplanes, microwave ovens, mobile communications, digital photography, internet, gps, radar, medicine tools, etc. However this is false dilemma and direct result of giant budget and lots of money reserved for military institutions. All those things would have been invented anyways if the Army/Nasa budget cut ratio is reversed. Not just invented the same but also with much better properties and quality considering they would be targeting wider civilian usage. Additionally, imagine those trillions of dollars redirected into space exploration just for couple of years - we would probably have artificial gravity already in production by now along with the fleet of interplanetary space crafts mining the asteroid belt and outer planets.
To get back to the title and it's embedded question - is Military really a sidetrack of the humanity? To me it definitively is, but also it is not created intentionally, it is just a reflection of current world order. It is just a matter of cause and effect, a kind of natural defense created by ultimate fear of simple survival. The ultimate fight of inner head's rational with emotional brain cells. The conclusion in this post is the same as the wisdom in the post I wrote last year by the name Intelligent Life. I'll just repeat the metaphorical conclusion: "It is unwise from some interstellar species to give us technology to leave the Earth, chances that we would use it for star wars are bigger than it could be used for peaceful exploration of solar system and beyond.".
Simply, the reptilian complex in our brains is still strong, evolutionary speaking. There is nothing we can do but wait for it's further influence degradation and fight it with reason more effectively.
Russia and China boost arms spending, US cuts back
http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/front/archives/2012/04/18/2003530615
Wait, how big is NASA’s budget again?
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2010/02/16/wait-how-big-is-nasas-budget-again/
Stockholm International Peace Research Institute
http://milexdata.sipri.org/
"You sleep in small rooms with other people usually on bank-beds and everyday you must get up and be out of bed exactly at 5 hundred hours and go outside to do physical exercises where you are usually forced to sing songs with no significant meanings. Three times a day you wait in line in order to eat or you don't get any food. You have to wear the same clothing like all others, take weekly showers in large mutual bathrooms and in other parts of the day you have to work on assigned jobs or learn how to survive fight with other people similar to you."
I don't know but I've been told
So what is it? I am sure there are several words with different meanings that easily fits the description but in relation to what I am going to write in this post the chosen word is: The Army. In this particular case, there is no room for accidental similarity with other words you might use. Simply, military service is created to be cruel where you must fit your position without thinking. There is no democracy here, you either obey orders or you are out. Along with others you have mutual name - The Troops. There is no individuality here other than your number on a metal plate you wear under the uniform. I have to add that I am not targeting any particular military service in this post, just wanted to write generally about worldwide armies in relation to what it means to our pure survival on this planet. I will also try not to sound pathetic and cry for Lennon's kind of slogans like "make love, not war" and stand an equally non-sensed and opposite position of the stick.
Instead, let's speak throughout the facts of a cruel world order as it is today as a result of couple of millenniums of human rapid evolution creamed with different religiosity, various animosities, cultural differences and different level of development monitoring in technology superior time comparing to previous centuries. If we look all our mutual aggressiveness and violent history the question is why aren't we doomed and wiped out with our own differences already? The answer is simple really and this is maybe predicted by Nikola Tesla long ago. Today the leading countries are in possession of a technology to hit a target as small as square meter from a distance measurable by hundreds of kilometers. Tesla once had this obsession of making a long distance weapon based on a electrical energy flashing throughout air capable of destroying the enemy located on different continent. He said that when all armies got in possession of such weapon any war would become meaningless as there would be no winner, only two losers and collateral damages in between.
Crusades - continuous religious wars
Nowadays, with all currently existing military technology, it looks like we are heading toward the planetary society like in this Tesla's vision. But, we are not there yet, surely there are more technology superior countries today than in the middle of previous century who polarized the world in a so called "Cold War", but still the same dangerous animosities of the past are still there. I remember when I listened a podcast about a book "The Omega Scroll" in the interview with author Adrian d'Hagé, former Australian brigadier and security officer. He shared his thoughts about current situations in the world of the time after 9/11 event and the open war against recognized terrorists in relation of religious dogma. Both sides often used a sentence "in the name of the god" while their active military campaigns performed outside their main countries or habitat if you will. Adrian d'Hagé is now a novelist and author of great adventurous novels in regards to military threats especially in terrorism and bioterrorism and I loved his glimpse on religious property of all violent "encounters" between Christianity, Islam and Judaism. These three religions seem to be the the major cause of all big warfare and conflicts in past two millenniums. Ironically, their dogmatic religious beliefs are connected to the same divine super being and the world would definitively be the better place if history of world's three major religions was more peaceful back then when it all started.
But to get back from the cause to the effect, worldwide armies nowadays are pretty different, depending on country, ideology and long term goals. Some of them depends on the state of the art armory and up to the date electronics in all aspects of military units with professionals hired and paid for their services just like in any other regular jobs while others depend on participating all people within their mandatory active service and also as in reserve or veteran units.
Also, some armies are trained for any kind of war everywhere on the planet while others specialize in their own territories only. Regardless of all the differences one thing is very much common for all worldwide armies. With small exceptions they all share the largest budget cuts comparing to all other annual expenses in their countries. Globally military spending on weapons are measurable by almost 2 trillion of US dollars. The more transparent numbers you can find on the net is about budget spending in USA where last year they spent $317 billions compared to only $12.8 for NASA. More or less the same story is everywhere else. Nobody is questioning the numbers though but every now and again I hear the same justification where people state importance of military research and inventions that first appeared or invented for army purposes and then spread to the civilians like airplanes, microwave ovens, mobile communications, digital photography, internet, gps, radar, medicine tools, etc. However this is false dilemma and direct result of giant budget and lots of money reserved for military institutions. All those things would have been invented anyways if the Army/Nasa budget cut ratio is reversed. Not just invented the same but also with much better properties and quality considering they would be targeting wider civilian usage. Additionally, imagine those trillions of dollars redirected into space exploration just for couple of years - we would probably have artificial gravity already in production by now along with the fleet of interplanetary space crafts mining the asteroid belt and outer planets.
To get back to the title and it's embedded question - is Military really a sidetrack of the humanity? To me it definitively is, but also it is not created intentionally, it is just a reflection of current world order. It is just a matter of cause and effect, a kind of natural defense created by ultimate fear of simple survival. The ultimate fight of inner head's rational with emotional brain cells. The conclusion in this post is the same as the wisdom in the post I wrote last year by the name Intelligent Life. I'll just repeat the metaphorical conclusion: "It is unwise from some interstellar species to give us technology to leave the Earth, chances that we would use it for star wars are bigger than it could be used for peaceful exploration of solar system and beyond.".
Simply, the reptilian complex in our brains is still strong, evolutionary speaking. There is nothing we can do but wait for it's further influence degradation and fight it with reason more effectively.
Russia and China boost arms spending, US cuts back
http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/front/archives/2012/04/18/2003530615
Wait, how big is NASA’s budget again?
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2010/02/16/wait-how-big-is-nasas-budget-again/
Stockholm International Peace Research Institute
http://milexdata.sipri.org/