the cause of all wars and strife; not religion, or politics, but...

[egb_hibs]

...young people!

or, to be less hyberbolic, one of the most pronounced correlative factors in most wars, especially idealogical ones, and / or periods of political upheaval - is a disproportionately large number of youth in the populations of participants, especially aggressors.

from the protestant reformers to the tamil tigers (and their sinhalese opponents) - revolutionaries, colonial expansionalists, the lot - have been characterised by bulges in their youth demographic.

handily, right now, the islamic world, and the chinese, are in the middle of such a swelling.

when you think about this, it all makes sense - you don't often see members of the salvation army juking it out with msps outside holyrood, but don't these young beggars cause a bit of bother? extreme politics is also disproportionately a hobby of the young.

the ramifications of this are surely clear; the aspiration to a stable, integrated society surely demands that we ban young people - right now.

And important first step would be to purge our education system of such a divisive and troublesome element - young people should have NO place in our schools and universities!

And finally, isn't it so ironic that the young blow hards are, even more than their older peers, so fond of blaming the world's ills on everybody else!

[Dub]

Originally Posted by egb_hibs

...young people!

or, to be less hyberbolic, one of the most pronounced correlative factors in most wars, especially idealogical ones, and / or periods of political upheaval - is a disproportionately large number of youth in the populations of participants, especially aggressors.

from the protestant reformers to the tamil tigers (and their sinhalese opponents) - revolutionaries, colonial expansionalists, the lot - have been characterised by bulges in their youth demographic.

handily, right now, the islamic world, and the chinese, are in the middle of such a swelling.

when you think about this, it all makes sense - you don't often see members of the salvation army juking it out with msps outside holyrood, but don't these young beggars cause a bit of bother? extreme politics is also disproportionately a hobby of the young.

the ramifications of this are surely clear; the aspiration to a stable, integrated society surely demands that we ban young people - right now.

And important first step would be to purge our education system of such a divisive and troublesome element - young people should have NO place in our schools and universities!

And finally, isn't it so ironic that the young blow hards are, even more than their older peers, so fond of blaming the world's ills on everybody else!

Well, thats my religion is the root of all theory blown out the water again egb.

[egb_hibs]

Originally Posted by Dub

Well, thats my religion is the root of all theory blown out the water again egb.

fuck it, let's ban that while we're at it. and atheism. and anything else you can think of.

i'm having a new labour moment

[Bartok]

The real reasons we have wars are indeed to do with the aggressiveness of males, especially young males. It is hardly ever about religion or ideology or politics or trade. It is because men want to fight.

[Dub]

Originally Posted by egb_hibs

fuck it, let's ban that while we're at it. and atheism. and anything else you can think of.

i'm having a new labour moment

Will there be meetings in the pub with a mandatory drink till you drop clause
Snooker nights out
Tenpin bowling nights
Golf outings
Scrabble evenings
and a 'learn how to win at Jenga by cheating' pamphlet.
oh and can we have girls please.
If so, count me in.


As long as theres no political discussion allowed until everyone is well on the way to pissed

[egb_hibs]

Originally Posted by Dixie Chicken

The real reasons we have wars are indeed to do with the aggressiveness of males, especially young males. It is hardly ever about religion or ideology or politics or trade. It is because men want to fight.

and - let's be honest - wummin can be almost as bad, once they get dragged into it.

i'm always incredulous at the old canard that if women run the world it would be peaceful place. my experience is that women are far more likely to pick a fight with their friends than chaps are.

[Pilrig]

The Y chromosome

[Pilrig]

Originally Posted by Dixie Chicken

The real reasons we have wars are indeed to do with the aggressiveness of males, especially young males. It is hardly ever about religion or ideology or politics or trade. It is because men want to fight.

Like I wrote above, the culprit is the Y chromosome.
Anyway, men will be extinct in a 1/4 million years due to the decay of the said chromosome.

[Dub]

Originally Posted by Dixie Chicken

The real reasons we have wars are indeed to do with the aggressiveness of males, especially young males. It is hardly ever about religion or ideology or politics or trade. It is because men want to fight.

I think you're wrong

[hibadelic]

Originally Posted by Dub

I think you're wrong

After watching the game in the Albion bar tonight, I think EGB is entirely right.

[HailHail]

old c##nts start/cause wars, youngsters actually fight them. ban the auld c##nts!

[egb_hibs]

that's the received wisdom HH, but it ain't necessarily so.

[Bartok]

Originally Posted by HailHail

old c##nts start/cause wars, youngsters actually fight them. ban the auld c##nts!

Nah. Look at all the photos and footage of crowds celebrating when war breaks out; it's the kids it appeals to.

[snoots]

Originally Posted by Dixie Chicken

Look at all the photos and footage of crowds celebrating when war breaks out

Could you provide a link to some?

[snoots]

Originally Posted by egb_hibs

...young people!

or, to be less hyberbolic, one of the most pronounced correlative factors in most wars, especially idealogical ones, and / or periods of political upheaval - is a disproportionately large number of youth in the populations of participants, especially aggressors.

from the protestant reformers to the tamil tigers (and their sinhalese opponents) - revolutionaries, colonial expansionalists, the lot - have been characterised by bulges in their youth demographic.

handily, right now, the islamic world, and the chinese, are in the middle of such a swelling.

when you think about this, it all makes sense - you don't often see members of the salvation army juking it out with msps outside holyrood, but don't these young beggars cause a bit of bother? extreme politics is also disproportionately a hobby of the young.

the ramifications of this are surely clear; the aspiration to a stable, integrated society surely demands that we ban young people - right now.

And important first step would be to purge our education system of such a divisive and troublesome element - young people should have NO place in our schools and universities!

And finally, isn't it so ironic that the young blow hards are, even more than their older peers, so fond of blaming the world's ills on everybody else!

Interesting.

Could you name a few Wars caused by young people, and show how they caused them?

[egb_hibs]

snoots - will get you some additional examples tonight. i got this from demographic analysis of ding-dongs contained in 'the clash of civilisations' by samuel huntington.

as i said in my qualifier to the the thread title, it's more a case of correlation. causality is indirect and resultant from social pressures associated with a young population as opposed to a simple case of a young fella standing up and shouting "let's invade poland'. that said the connection is more direct where radical movements are involved, as they are disproportionately populated by younger fellies.

the CoC predicts the tensions with islamism will cool come the 2030s when the major youth bulge in the islamic world tapers off.

[egb_hibs]

some examples, btw, of said social pressures;

- political militancy / radicalism - and reduced inclination to compromise
- aggressive (re)assertion of cultural identity
- economic migration - and general inclination to move about and settle land
- a further step from previous point - expansionist pressures deriving from need to accomodate a go-getting young population that cannot be satisified within boundaries of existing resources

[HailHail]

Originally Posted by Dixie Chicken

Nah. Look at all the photos and footage of crowds celebrating when war breaks out; it's the kids it appeals to.

What wars /period are we talking about? Don't get me wrong, I kinda see the argument, particularly in revoltionary wars like vietnam/russia even Ireland on a number of occassions in the past. Mostly because skint, disillusioned young men (and women) with no hope and nothing to lose would be relatively easy to convince to take up arms for an idea that might promise them a better life, and a chance to vent that anger/frustration on someone. Older heads would probably think more about the consequences . off the top of my sawdust crammed napper I can think of

ww1. started (kind of) by the black hand, most of whom's operatives were young men (including a certain mr princip).

Hundred years war - well edward III was no old man when that started.

the '45. Charles was 25

War of the two kings 1688-1691 - James II's army relied heavilly on young catholic recruits thirsting to have a crack at ulster protestants, Williams army benefited in a similar way, if less drastically. Both sides exploited the burning resentment of the people to swell their ranks.

United irish rebellion - no coincidence that this erupted soon after a lot of young, well trained battle hardened irish exiles returned home after serving France till the revolution .

[Bartok]

Originally Posted by HailHail

What wars /period are we talking about? Don't get me wrong, I kinda see the argument, particularly in revoltionary wars like vietnam/russia even Ireland on a number of occassions in the past. Mostly because skint, disillusioned young men (and women) with no hope and nothing to lose would be relatively easy to convince to take up arms for an idea that might promise them a better life, and a chance to vent that anger/frustration on someone. Older heads would probably think more about the consequences . off the top of my sawdust crammed napper I can think of

ww1. started (kind of) by the black hand, most of whom's operatives were young men (including a certain mr princip).

Hundred years war - well edward III was no old man when that started.

the '45. Charles was 25

War of the two kings 1688-1691 - James II's army relied heavilly on young catholic recruits thirsting to have a crack at ulster protestants, Williams army benefited in a similar way, if less drastically. Both sides exploited the burning resentment of the people to swell their ranks.

United irish rebellion - no coincidence that this erupted soon after a lot of young, well trained battle hardened irish exiles returned home after serving France till the revolution .

HH I didn't really mean the political elites who are always credited/blamed for starting wars, I was really questioning whether they do that at all. It is populations who get themselves behind rival 'popular' political or nationalist movements and ideologies. The fact is that a ruler or ruling body without the support of the country or at the very least the armed forces can't go to war.

Snoots. I will see if I can dig up an unrepresentative sample of pictures all in support of my argument later on.

[egb_hibs]

Originally Posted by Dixie Chicken

HH I didn't really mean the political elites who are always credited/blamed for starting wars, I was really questioning whether they do that at all. It is populations who get themselves behind rival 'popular' political or nationalist movements and ideologies. The fact is that a ruler or ruling body without the support of the country or at the very least the armed forces can't go to war.

I agree - i don't buy the 'great men' school of history (although nor do i preclude their role), but the masses have a centre stage role. abdicating them from responsibility is a mistake, even if it is comforting.