Walter Block: I Ain’t Gonna Study War No Mo!

By Walter E. Block              

Wouldn’t it be nice if the Israelis and Hamas could settle their differences in court instead of through battle? We have in mind an objective court, a just court, such that both sides would view the verdict satisfied that justice had been done, even though it was not (fully) to their liking. We would need Solomon like judges who offer to cut babies in half. Wouldn’t it be nice if Russia and Ukraine could avail themselves of this sort of a procedure? Wouldn’t it be lovely if both World Wars never took place and instead the disagreement that existed then resolved in this manner? Wouldn’t it be peachy if the dispute between the Ibos and the Hutus could have been prevented through such a means? Ditto for the North and the South regarding the war to prevent the secession of the latter. Nor should we forget in this regard Chinese and the Taiwanese. Wouldn’t it be glorious if no war had ever occurred in the entire history of the human race?

If so, there would be many more people who would have been born than actually occurred. We might have missed out on more Mozarts, more Jonas Salks, more Einsteins, more Adam Smiths, more Ayn Rands, more Alan Turings, more Hayeks, more Miseses, more Rothbards, more Ron Pauls, more Edisons.

Why has the human race not had such blessings? Why are we continually engaged in mass murder against each other?

There are various explanations. One is that the Devil is out there, spreading his malign influence. Another explains this situation on the basis of Adam and Eve being kicked out of the Garden of Eden. Another blames this on greed, profits and capitalism. (I prefer either of the first two of these three to the third, as an accurate account).

Here is a more plausible elucidation: sociobiology. This is the theory that we are the way we are, now, based in large part on what it took approximately a zillion years ago when our species still lived in trees, or caves, to leave more of our genetic code to the next generation than others.

Benevolence, willingness to share at least with close relatives, decency, are some of the characteristics to which we are heir. If we are at a restaurant, and even a total stranger starts choking, we do not sit idly by, continuing our conversation and mastication. At the very least we are mightily perturbed at this eventuality, and most of us start thinking about, if we do not actively engage in, yet, Heimlich maneuvers, calling for an ambulance, etc. This is because prehistorically we lived in groups of 20-50 people, with virtually all others as close relatives. Our diet was mainly based on picking berries and hunting for game. If you caught a deer and would not share with others, you were kicked out of the small tribe and your chances of bearing children were diminished.

But there were negative characteristics, too, that increased the likelihood of transferring your genetic material to your progeny. Rape might possibly have been one of them. That crime is still committed in the modern day. Fighting ability almost certainly could have been another. Being bigger and stronger than others would have conferred advantages in this regard, particularly for men. (Appreciation for free enterprise would not, since back in them thar days there would have been little occasion for entrepreneurship, profits, trade, etc.).

Thus, in our efforts to reduce the incidence of war, we are contending against a force of great power: that of biology. We will, at least for the foreseeable future, continue to be rolling that particular rock up and down Mount Sisyphus.

Do these remarks help us in this quest to not engage in war “no more” since it will undoubtedly continue to exist despite our best efforts? Not directly, of course. But maybe indirectly. For in order to solve any problem, overcome any challenge, we have to start somewhere. It behooves us to know what is the difficulty in the first place. It must necessarily be part of the solution to know the genesis of the problem. Sociobiological considerations may be of help in this regard.

There is only one problem with ending mankind’s tendency to engage in war. If we become too peaceful, we will disarm ourselves and thus when and if we are faced with an alien threat we will be more helpless than otherwise. Yes, this is rather unlikely. So far so good, at least on that front. There doesn’t seem to be anyone “out there” who could conquer us. We have not yet seen evidence of any extraterrestrial beings. (But we should engage in war games so that when and if aliens attacked us, we wouldn’t be helpless).

One can be excused for wondering whether or not if any such threat eventuated, would the entire human race coalesce to combat it? Would Arabs and Jews, Ukrainians and Russians, Hutus and Ibos, Americans and Chinese really fight side by side against such a common enemy? Probably not, at least not as people are today. But who knows? Necessity may still be the mother of invention even in such a weird case.

Author

Walter E. Block, Ph.D.

Harold E. Wirth Eminent Scholar Endowed Chair and Professor of Economics,             

Loyola University New Orleans

Pegs:

Levendis, John, Walter E. Block and Robert B. Eckhardt. 2019. “Evolutionary psychology, economic freedom, trade and benevolence.” Review of Economic Perspectives – Národohospodářský obzor; Vol. 19, No. 2, pp. 73-92; https://content.sciendo.com/view/journals/revecp/19/2/article-p73.xml; 10.2478/revecp-2019-0005; DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/revecp-2019-0005; https://www.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blog/here-is-one-of-my-best-scholarly-papers-ever/; https://pennstate.pure.elsevier.com/en/publications/evolutionary-psychology-economic-freedom-trade-and-benevolence; https://www.growkudos.com/publications/10.2478%252Frevecp-2019-0005/reade; file:///C:/Users/WBlock/AppData/Local/Microsoft/Windows/INetCache/Content.Outlook/18LCUGME/18041663%20-%20Review%20of%20Economic%20Perspectives%20Evolutionary%20psychology%20economic%20freedom%20trade%20and%20benevolence.pdf