• 0 Posts
  • 16 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: August 11th, 2023

help-circle
  • Semjaza@lemmynsfw.comtomemes@lemmy.worldBig if true
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    6 days ago

    Yes. The Second World War had a deathtoll about 60 times higher. (.3 is much more than I gave it credit for.)

    Korean War probably more than 3 million.

    Returning to smaller scale war is not an end of war. Nor even close to ending wars. Imperialism causes wider ranging wars is all, as whole networks of military apparatus are mobilised. Modern empires are more nebulous.

    Edit: also, your WW2 figure is including civilians and acts of genocide. I think your Vietnamese figure is combatants only.


  • Semjaza@lemmynsfw.comtomemes@lemmy.worldBig if true
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    7 days ago

    Yes, the Korean war was the biggest with soldiers from dozens of countries dying in action, with a localised theatre.

    But how many of those civil wars were hot parts of the Cold War? Can we not lump them into a single Cold War total?

    The death toll of the world wars is huge, but equally the death tolls of the strife across Saharan and Central Africa and the Middle East isn’t insignificant. Do we just leave it off the record because the combatants are only our proxies? Fighting with our guns, for our benefit, rather than a war on land we’ve yet to relinquish control over?

    Edit: though I’ve gone on a massive tangent. My original point that I let my mind forget and spout off on a tangent, was that there have been lots of wars with coalitions of allies feeding arms to the sides, as we now see in Ukraine in the intervening 70 years. Just less close to home.










  • I agree with all your points on Communism. At least in terms of how it’s been implemented, at least in name, by the Soviet Union and the PRC it has been as extractivist and imperialist as Capitalist nations.

    Though one can’t really divorce the conditions in countries such as Nigeria or Bangladesh from Capitalism. The Global North’s standard of living requires the conditions there to exist, the Socialist with Totalitarian Characteristic nations at least keep their poor conditions mostly in house (albiet with some local imperialism, and the PRC has recently started expanding outside it’s borders though mostly infrastructure and resource acquisition so far.)

    They’re not quite two sides of the same coin as the goals for growth are expressly different but neither cares for social connections, a sense of belonging, society in the real, let alone the environment.


  • Those still to be solved problems may also be the result of governments. Those problems would likely shrink (albiet be replaced by others) when there aren’t global systems of power and exploitation pushing to keep extracting resources from a corrupted Global South, polluting as processed by an overworked Asia, into commodities to sell to underpaid and liminally employed citizens of the Global North for them to destress and feel a fleeting sense of meaning in our increasingly atomised societies.


  • More Anarchist, I think that we should try to disengage from states and their power structures and treat people with respect and autonomy. Try to bring thee principles into daily life and interactions and live as much of a better alternative as I can.

    Devolution of powers is a fine first step to work towards if engaging electorily, but that’s a long way from the be all and end all of political ideology.