Sign of Advancing Society? An Organized War Effort

www.nytimes.com...

It seems that scientists are determining through recent research that ancient society's that became successful also incorporated warfare very early on and did not live peaceful existences as some have speculated.

A wave of new research is supporting this second view. Charles Stanish and Abigail Levine, archaeologists at the University of California, Los Angeles, have traced the rise of the pristine states that preceded the Inca empire. The first villages in the region were formed some 3,500 years ago. Over the next 1,000 years, some developed into larger regional centers, spaced about 12 to 15 miles apart. Then, starting around 500 B.C., signs of warfare emerged in the form of trophy heads and depictions of warriors, the two archaeologists report in last week’s Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

It will be interesting to see if this warfare angle can be tied to either the rise of civilizations or if it's actually part of the humans psyche.

Reply to post by kro32

its not news, its has been a prevalent mark of civilization.

if you read through the know history books, over 50% is warfare, catastrophe and bloodshed.

our technology advances always due to military research.

medicine
ergonomy
standardization
communication
food processing
and plenty more

if it works on the battlefield it will do for the masses.

our information age gadgets were conceived and designed for ww2, we are still decades behind what military r&d are working on now.

the study seems acurate

personally i would just omit the word advanced...

but thats me


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

reply to post by kro32


Like the Mahabharata supposed Nuclear and Advanced technology Warfare. SO much new things being discovered that people have been ridiculed for proposing.

How do you define a "successful society"? One that has achieved superiority through conquest? That sounds like barbarism to me, and regardless of anyone's definition of social success, is an utter humanitarian failure.

Is it technological prowess? Only if that technology is designed and employed for benevolent purposes, which is usually not the case. As pointed out earlier in the thread, most technology is developed with the intent of killing people, not helping them--charity is simply an afterthought. I won't get into the political and economic factors which drive this "evil for the sake of good" delusional phenomena, but its moral hypocrisy should be clear.

It seems to me that this “study” is mere academic propaganda, intended to justify militarism under an undefined pretense of “success”. War is the antithesis of progress, not a predictor of it.

Chimpanzees organize war bands to steal territory from other chimpanzees. They engage in planning and battlefield tactics in the conflict.

It's just a sign that deep down. we're still just apes.

Humans have not advanced.

They killed each other from the start.

And they kill each other now.

What other species wipes out their own species? And the planet?