What drives human begins to fight wars and conflicts Essay Example
What Drives Human Beings to Fight Wars and Conflicts
The global nations and societies have over the years encountered increased conflicts and wars. Historically, the world has experienced three large scale wars the World War 1, two and the cold war. The world wars led to increased political, social and economic systems change. As such, the wars resulted to increased human suffering, with implications lasting to date. For instance, the Nagasaki and Hiroshima attacks in Japan in the Second World War have had implications to date. The region continues to experience genetic mutations and the birth of deformed children. A similar instance is the human suffering and deaths experienced in the Vietnam War, which claimed increased number of lives lost and economic destruction resulting to the current low economic growth rate in the economy. A recent war case is the ongoing Syrian war that has led to reduced economic growth, deaths and increased human suffering. A conflict case can be cited in the existing border conflicts between Israel and Pakistan nations. Therefore, as Caty Clement (2005, p. 19) established, based on the negative conflicts and war, it is imperative to establish their causes. This essay is a review of factors that influence human beings into war and conflicts. As such, the essay argumentatively evaluates the causes and consequently argues out remedies to these issues.
One key cause of wars and conflicts among human beings is the existence of ideological differences. Naturally, human beings have ideological variances. In general, there are two key ideological perspectives in the world namely, capitalism and communism respectively. On one hand, capitalism ideology adopts an individual perspectives approach in the market. In this case, the ideology argues that in order to enhance market efficiency and facilitate increased economic development, the existing authorities should reduce their control on the market. In addition, economic assets and factors ownership should be on an individual basis. This is argued to increase a competition spirit that facilitates increased productivity. On the other hand, the communist approach ideology is a contrast to the capitalist approach. On its part, the communist ideology advocates for increased societal control and ownership of the economic assets. In this case, there exists no individual control of economic factors in the market. Instead, the government retains control of the systems and the existing market systems (Clark, 2000, p. 219). As such, under a communist ideology the government retains absolute control of the market. Moreover, ownership of the assets is on a communal basis, and individual entitlement is reduced. In the period before the World War II, this was the existing situation in Europe and USA. On one hand, USA and the Western Europe regions had adopted the capitalist approach. Matray (2001, p. 231) argued that the regions advocated for increased free market approach and control. However, the situation was different in the Eastern Europe region and the United Soviet Socialist Republic (USSR). One key nation applying this ideology was Germany under the Nazi leadership by Hitler. The nation wanted to exert its ideology and influential control in the economy especially in control of the agrarian revolution. Therefore, under the ideological differences influence, the Nazi government to initiate world war 11 in a bid to exert communist on Western Europe, as well as the rest of the world. Additionally, ideological differences as a cause of conflicts and war among human beings can be cited in the case of the cold war rivalry between USA and the then USSR. At this time, the two superpowers possessed diverse ideologies in economic management. While as the USSR government advocated for increased communism, on the other hand, USA advocated for a capitalist government in the market. This led to increased disharmony and lack of trust between the nations resulting to the emergence of the cold war. In addition, ideological differences between the Israel and Palestine governments have led to the increased rivalries between the nations. These ideological differences emanate from religion differences between the two nations. The Palestine nation professes the Muslim faith, while the Israel nation professes the Muslim faith. As such, there exists an ideological difference between the nations. As a result, the nations have over the years experienced increased ideological differences with each claiming historical and religion ownership of the Jerusalem region. These ideological differences have resulted to increased conflicts between the two nations. Therefore, based on this analysis, it is apparent that the existence of ideological differences, economic, cultural political and religion serve as factors influencing increased human beings exposure to conflicts and wars in the globe.
A second factor influencing humans to increased wars and conflicts in the global platform is discrimination and uneven distribution of resources in the society. In this case, this is imperatively an economic issue in the market. Global economics influence societal and political institutions performance in the market. In this regard, economic performance in the global market influences the functioning of other supportive institutions. Economic performance determines a nation’s growth rate and living standards in the society. Increased growth and economic development imply increased social and societal living standards. As such, this facilitates a culture of equality in the global nations. Equality is an imperative tool for the enhancement of peace and reduced conflicts. This scenario can be evidenced in the case of India in its fight for independence. Nicholson (2003, p. 24) stated that, in the quest for India’s independence, Mahatma Gandhi is identified as one of the key personalities who facilitated this independence attainment. In his independence advocacy, Gandhi argued on the case of equality in the nation. He argued that, despite the vast natural resources in the Indian economy, only a few of the individuals in the market benefited. Gandhi argued that inequality in resources allocation, as well as inequality in social justices’ administration, was rampant in India. It is on this platform that the independence advocacy in India was formed. This was the scenario in other global nations advocating for independence across Africa. Moreover, inequality existence as a source of increased wars and conflicts among humans can be cited in the case of the American civil war. Gallagher (2003, p. 53) stated that the American civil war emerged as a result of increased discrimination among individuals in the nations. The Southern States advocated for increased slavery trade while the Northern States advocated for an end to this discriminatory and racial practice. The election of President Abraham Lincoln led to secession declaration instances in the Southern States as they were discriminated form the presidential election process. These inequalities in the market led to the eventual American civil war In addition, unequal distribution of resources can be argued in the case of the African Arab nation’s uprisings in the cases of Egypt and Libya whose citizens resulted to revolutionary conflict approach to enhancing leadership democracy in the region (Nunns, Idle and Soueif, 2011, p. 95). Therefore, in the cases of independence struggle conflicts, it is apparent that the concept of increased inequalities and discrimination in resources and justice increases instances of war and conflicts among human beings. A recent case of inequalities as a source of human conflicts and wars is the civil war in Syria. The Syrian civil war was a result of civilian protest against the Baathist regime in the country. The nation’s involvement in the Israel-Palestine conflict resulted to a feeling of discrimination of the non Arab citizens. Consequently, this led to increased conflicts and the eventual civil war in the economy. As such, it is apparent that the existence of social injustices, both political and economic increases instances of human conflicts and the eventual resultant of wars in the global market. Therefore, reduction of global wars and conflicts can only be established through increased social justices and equality systems.
Despite the developed argument that wars and conflicts among human beings a prevalent element resulting from increased influencing factors, a number of arguments and studies in nature, establish that the urge for violence, conflicts and war among human beings is not an externally influenced factor but rather an internally generated and emerging component. In this regard, the concept of war and conflicts is argued to be an inherent component among human beings. Skeem, Monahan and Mulvey (2002, p. 578) argued that human beings are inherently psychologically oriented towards violence. As such, a study to evaluate the nature and cause of conflicts among human beings by Byrne (2011, p. 498) suggested that individuals resulted to violence as an ideal conflict resolution approach. In this case, violence among individuals was described as an inborn trait that was largely perceived as an ideal easy and quick way for resolving disagreements and dissenting issues among human beings. Physiologically, individuals are presented with alternatives for issues and disagreements resolution. However, violence ranks as the most physiologically preferred alternative. Human beings have a tendency to influence others in the society. As such, once they individually resolve to use violence and conflicts as a resolution approach, they influence others in the society to support their course. As rational beings, human use logical decision making process and influence form peers to result to increased violence and conflicts in the global society. Therefore, based on these aspects, it is apparent that conflict and violence is an inherent trait in human beings. As such, the majority of the eventual violence and conflicts in the global nations is not influenced by any existing forces, but rather emanates from internal human traits and the influence aspect among human behaviour’s. However, these studies arguing conflicts as internally driven, has been disputed by arranging of studies and arguments. Such arguments include one developed by Hautzinger (1997, p. 6) who argued that violence and conflict resolution methods are learnt issues rather than inherently acquired. Therefore, the study established that individuals learn conflicts resolution based on their immediate environments such as culture, religion and political systems. For instance, this can be evidenced by the rate of increased civil wars in Africa. The civil wars, despite their immediate causes being issues such as inequalities in the society, have their cause in ignorance and the existence of a culture with minimal social and cultural integration. Therefore, the existence of increased conflicts and eventual wars in such societies evidences that the development and growth of a violent resolution culture are externally influenced. In addition, an example to evidence that the development of a violence culture is externally influenced and not internally motivated (Harris, 2012, p. 210). The case of India as discussed in this essay is a good illustration of how external factors inculcate a culture of violence, conflicts and war. Initially, Gandhi advocated for a peaceful resolution of the challenges and conflicts facing the indigenous Indian communities. Moreover, the supporters supported a peaceful approach to the conflict. However, upon the use of force by the British government, the Indians resulted to increased use of violence and the eventual Indian struggle for independence war that emanated.
In summary, this essay establishes that violence, war and conflicts in the global societies. The essay establishes that war and conflicts ranging from the world wars, through the struggles for independence and the recent evolutional national conflicts such as the Syrian civil war, have external driving factors. Based on the trend and occurrence patterns of these events, the essay argues that human beings exposure and use of conflicts and violence have external driving factors. In its analysis, the essay establishes that a major conflicts and war driving factor among human beings in the society is the presence of ideologies differences. In this regard, the essay establishes that differences such as diversities in economic ideologies and religion are key among such perceptions. In this regard, the essay cites the instances of the world wars and the Israel-Palestine border conflict as among examples of wars emanating from economic and religion differences respectively. In addition, the essay argues that the existence of social injustices and unequal distribution of resources is an additional driving human factor into conflicts and wars. As such, the essay establishes that increased social injustices and discrimination leads to anger and desire for revenge. As such, individuals result into violence and war as the justice systems that would be expected to raise increased challenges resolution have failed. However, the essay establishes that human beings are inherently violent and psychologically result to violence as a conflict resolution alternative. However, this argument is disputed with examples that evidence that the development of violent human trait is influenced by a range of external factors such as culture and ignorance levels.
Byrne, Edmund F. 2011. Business ethics should study illicit businesses: To advance respect for human rights. Journal of Business Ethics 103, (4) (11): 497-509
Caty Clément. 2005. Neverending wars: The international community, weak states, and the perpetuation of civil war. Ethics & International Affairs 19, (2): 119-121,
Clark, Terry D. 2000. The transition from communism to capitalism: Ruling elites from Gorbachev to yeltsin. The American Political Science Review 94, (1) (03): 218-219
Gallagher, Gary E. 2003. The American Civil War. Oxford: Osprey Publishers
Harris, David. 2012. Civil War and democracy in West Africa: conflict resolution, elections and justice in Sierra Leone and Liberia. New York: I .B. Tauris.
Hautzinger, Sarah. 1997. «Calling a state a state»: Feminist politics and the policing of violence against women in Brazil. Feminist Issues 15, (1-2): 3-30
Matray, James Irving. 2001. Japan’s emergence as a global power. Westport, Conn: Greenwood Press.
Nicholson, Michael. 2003. Mahatma Gandhi: leader of Indian independence. San Diego: Blackbirch Press.
Nunns, Alex, Nadia Idle, and Ahdaf Soueif. 2011. Tweets from Tahrir: Egypt’s revolution as it unfolded, in the words of the people who made it. New York: OR Books.
Skeem, Jennifer L., John Monahan, and Edward P. Mulvey. 2002. Psychopathy, treatment involvement, and subsequent violence among civil psychiatric patients. Law and human behavior 26, (6) (12): 577-603
More Important Things