< Open-Ended

~enochthechronocom

I think James Conant may have been right; not only about the use of a nuclear weapon decreasing the chance of future uses, but also about it decreasing war in general. As the historian Yuval Noah Harari writes, of a stasis he calls “The New Peace”:

“Nuclear weapons have turned war between superpowers into a mad act of collective suicide, and therefore forced the most powerful nations on earth to find alternative and peaceful ways to resolve conflicts.”

So:

“When in 1913 people said that there was peace between France and Germany, they meant that ‘there is no war going on at the present between France and Germany.’ When today we say that there is peace between France and Germany, we mean that it is inconceivable under any foreseeable circumstances that war might break out between them.”

Write a reply

Replies

~zampano wrote:

I certainly couldn't refute what he said, no. But the best we can do is guess; there's no way to know what would've been.