Capitalism is killing our morals, our future (link included)

[rkbabang]

I think it depends on what you mean by "morality". That is somewhat relative and up for debate.  If you mean not stealing, killing, assaulting others and dealing with each other peacefully rather than violently, then we are a more moral society than we've ever been.  If you mean staying in a relationship where you are unhappy, because someone thinks divorce is "immoral" then, well, yes, by your particular definition of "morality" we are less "moral" then we used to be.

[yp]

I've always been confused by the notion that one system or another is destroying our morals.  Looking back at history I don't understand how anyone can say things are getting worse not better...

 

Have you looked at what's on TV? Divorce rates? Single and unwed parents? Acceptable drug use?

 

A book that talks a bit about the change in culture is "Quiet: The Power of Introverts in a World that Can't Stop Talking." She goes in some depth about how, at one time, we were a culture of character (Buffett's generation and prior). Doing the "right" thing was championed.  Now, we are more of a culture of personality (people like Kim Kardashian). Where we value what gets are attention compared to what's intrinsically motivating.

 

I totally agree that what's on tv is scary, but as Peter Diamandis explores in the following video, maybe it's a bit of an over representation. I mean I totally agree things are bad (and I do agree that the likes of Kim kardashian are rotting at the morals of our society) but I think things haven't really gotten worse, if anything there's a lot that's gotten better. As the video shows, majority of the people living under the poverty line still have access to things that were a luxury even 10 to 20 years ago.

 

I think the world requires a great deal of work, for sure, I'm right with you on that, but maybe the media isn't the best representation for the current state of affairs. Just my two cents(in collaboration with Mr. Diamandis) :)

 

Here's the video:

 

P.s. even things like the Sandy Hook shootings and the Boston Marathon Bombing, as bad as they are (with much respect to the departed), I think they made to seem much worse because of what is over coverage by the media in my view. Constant coverage of such things by the media, I think, just promotes fear and leads to increased anxiety and other issues among people.

 

Also, speaking of Kim Kardashian, haven't the masses always wanted a means to get a glimpse into the life of superstars and royalty (in exchange further enriching and idolizing such people). I mean I love this sorta discussion (on society and morals) but I feel like a lot of people just would much rather read about the new poodle Kim Kardashian just bought or something.

 

Question: Do you have any sort of ideas as to how the morals of society can be "improved"? (Improved in the general sense I guess meaning toward less greed, selfishness, doing the "right" thing, etc.) I love thinking about this question.

 

Btw, I haven't read that Susan Cain book, but I've seen the TED talk, definitely a good one!

 

yp, thanks for the video. I'll try to check it out in a bit. I'd suggest Cain's book. It's certainly a worthwhile read. She goes a bit into how things used to be versus how they are now. Popular books then included topics about improving ones character and the like. I think the only real way to improve morality is to value it. Unfortunately, there isn't a lot of money or fame to be made on that.  :P

 

This is so true. I think this is happening very slowly. As a child I was under the impression that we all should aspire to be filthy rich so we can buy nice cars and mansions. But as I started to learn about the likes of mr. Buffett, my views have significantly changed. So much so that every time I hear about the ridiculous extravagances of the billionaires of today, I cringe thinking at how much more could have been done of that money.

 

The idea of "eqo" as a negative makes a lot of sense to me. I feel that even the most successful and wealthiest of people owe some part of their success to sheer luck, good fortune or what have you. But the meritocratic belief that "I am wealthy because I deserve it and those who are poor are lazy and fools" is very premature and highly egoistic in my view. I think there needs to be a shift towards humility and giving up foolish egos and snobbery.

 

This books sounds great, I look forward to reading it this summer.

[yp]

As long as our society ( western civilization) is ego based it will never "improve". Attachment to profit and a sense of entitlement is all ego based behavior and creates a feeling of always wanting "more". If your self worth is attached to your stock quote then you're playing a losing game its all an illusion. Even if you're net worth keeps increasing you will always want "more". So is capitalism killing our society? In the end i would say no if you're aware that its all an illusion and ego based. The sheer awareness ( consicousness) will create change and create conscious capitalism. John Mackey the founder of whole foods wrote a book about this. Capitalism with the intention to connect the world, change lives, and show compassion over profits will bring what i call capitalism 2.0. Paradoxically, capitalism focused on connecting the world and creating real change will equate to more profits.  Step one is always awareness. With awareness you know nothing is tangible in this world. We all are going to pass and this game we play should be played cause its fun not for profit. And our goal as humans is to try to end suffering for our fellow humans cause we all are connected. Capitalism is on the right track cause companies out their do focus more on connecting the world over profits. We are in the beginning stages of the refinement of capitalism. Capitalism works so well cause us humans are hardwired to be ego based until the ego destroys the world. Being aware of how dangerous ego based behavior is we can change capitalism to end suffering. I think people understand this better now since 2008-2009. Or maybe not . Maybe we are doomed to repeat the same mistakes over and over again. I hope not. Capitalism 2.0 seems like a better game to play.

 

I like what you're saying here.

 

In case you haven't seen it, here's a video that I feel is somewhat connected to what you're saying about ego:

 

Giving up false egos and prejudgement could do the world good. Definitely connected to the 2007-2008 financial crisis.

[Parsad]

I've always been confused by the notion that one system or another is destroying our morals.  Looking back at history I don't understand how anyone can say things are getting worse not better...

 

Have you looked at what's on TV? Divorce rates? Single and unwed parents? Acceptable drug use?

 

A book that talks a bit about the change in culture is "Quiet: The Power of Introverts in a World that Can't Stop Talking." She goes in some depth about how, at one time, we were a culture of character (Buffett's generation and prior). Doing the "right" thing was championed.  Now, we are more of a culture of personality (people like Kim Kardashian). Where we value what gets are attention compared to what's intrinsically motivating.

 

I don't see a lot of value in unhappy marriages.  Divorce rates in the past would have been much higher if it weren't for two things: 1) a huge stigma against it, and 2) marriage having far different purposes than it does now (i.e. economic rather than a relationship). Single and unwed parents have much the same cause.

 

TV may in fact be a moral decline, but a different one than you may think; I think it's the willingness of the corporations and producers to make whatever crap that sells to make money.  The almighty dollar rules above all.  In our recent past, the evils were simply different; let's not whitewash things.  It wasn't that long ago, historically, that women were nothing but accessories to men, with few rights as people.  Do I need to go into slavery, racism, and so on?  Look back at chicken and dog fighting being much more common.  Not that these things are gone now, but the areas, the emphasis was different. 

 

The main reason people think things are so awful is sensationalism, and a rose-tinted glasses look at the past.  Drug use--depends on the drug.  Alcohol has always been a hugely popular drug in this country, and it has much more harm than does something like cannabis.  We tried prohibition before and it failed, we were just a bit slower this time since it isn't *quite* as huge a section of the country that uses weed.

 

Harder drugs do have bigger negative effects, but we have gone about solving the problem with guns and prisons rather than trying to rehabilitate and remove the need for the drug.  Guess which one would be cheaper and more effective?

 

Overall though, crime is in a multi-decade downtrend, though you wouldn't think that if you watched the news.  There are real problems in this country, but we *have* come a long way, in fits and starts.

 

Thanks for the thoughtful response, rmitz. You bring up valid points.

 

I will respectfully disagree about marriages though. I feel that people give up way easier now. Perhaps it's my rose tinted glass (and perhaps because I didn't live in the time), but it seems to me that people use to try a lot harder to keep their marriages intact. Happiness is a choice. It takes sacrifice from both parties. Now, it's so socially acceptable that people, many times, aren't willing to sacrifice when they can simply trade in their spouse for a new one...kind of like a car.

 

Paul, I think you are just getting old!  ;D  They were saying the same thing in the 70's with free love and all that...you had gritty shows on tv like "The Streets of San Francisco" or "Hawaii Five-0" and movies like "Taxi Driver" and "The Godfather".  Heck, the Stones put out an album called "Sympathy For The Devil!"  The previous generation thought the world was going to hell in a handbasket.  But guess what?  That free-love generation ended up creating the likes of Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Jeff Bezos, etc.  Some of the people who have changed this world for the better...not worse! 

 

Morals aren't in decline.  They have always been the same...with some ebbs and flows.  Culture is fluid and changes with the times, as does what is acceptable and what isn't.  The world for all of its flaws is getting better, not worse.  As Buffett says, your children will live better and longer than you, and their children better than them.  Just think about how much in capital will flow to the world through "The Giving Pledge" alone?  I'm an optimist...it will always be easier to blow ourselves up, but humanity will somehow manage to triumph...and capitalism will not only pave the way, but will be the ONLY way to get there.  Cheers!

[rkbabang]

Martian, Thank you for posting that.  It is so simple, yet so little understood.  There are only two ways humans can interact with one another. By force or by trade.  How much human misery would be avoided if people simply stopped demonizing trade and leaving the world to its alternative.

 

BTW, I just re-read that this past January, the first time since I was a teenager (over 20 years ago).  She has one glaring blind spot, a huge contradiction in a book which says over and over again that contradictions don't exist (her insistence that the existence of government is a necessity), but there is so much right in what she writes.

[Guest]

I've always been confused by the notion that one system or another is destroying our morals.  Looking back at history I don't understand how anyone can say things are getting worse not better...

 

Have you looked at what's on TV? Divorce rates? Single and unwed parents? Acceptable drug use?

 

A book that talks a bit about the change in culture is "Quiet: The Power of Introverts in a World that Can't Stop Talking." She goes in some depth about how, at one time, we were a culture of character (Buffett's generation and prior). Doing the "right" thing was championed.  Now, we are more of a culture of personality (people like Kim Kardashian). Where we value what gets are attention compared to what's intrinsically motivating.

 

I don't see a lot of value in unhappy marriages.  Divorce rates in the past would have been much higher if it weren't for two things: 1) a huge stigma against it, and 2) marriage having far different purposes than it does now (i.e. economic rather than a relationship). Single and unwed parents have much the same cause.

 

TV may in fact be a moral decline, but a different one than you may think; I think it's the willingness of the corporations and producers to make whatever crap that sells to make money.  The almighty dollar rules above all.  In our recent past, the evils were simply different; let's not whitewash things.  It wasn't that long ago, historically, that women were nothing but accessories to men, with few rights as people.  Do I need to go into slavery, racism, and so on?  Look back at chicken and dog fighting being much more common.  Not that these things are gone now, but the areas, the emphasis was different. 

 

The main reason people think things are so awful is sensationalism, and a rose-tinted glasses look at the past.  Drug use--depends on the drug.  Alcohol has always been a hugely popular drug in this country, and it has much more harm than does something like cannabis.  We tried prohibition before and it failed, we were just a bit slower this time since it isn't *quite* as huge a section of the country that uses weed.

 

Harder drugs do have bigger negative effects, but we have gone about solving the problem with guns and prisons rather than trying to rehabilitate and remove the need for the drug.  Guess which one would be cheaper and more effective?

 

Overall though, crime is in a multi-decade downtrend, though you wouldn't think that if you watched the news.  There are real problems in this country, but we *have* come a long way, in fits and starts.

 

Thanks for the thoughtful response, rmitz. You bring up valid points.

 

I will respectfully disagree about marriages though. I feel that people give up way easier now. Perhaps it's my rose tinted glass (and perhaps because I didn't live in the time), but it seems to me that people use to try a lot harder to keep their marriages intact. Happiness is a choice. It takes sacrifice from both parties. Now, it's so socially acceptable that people, many times, aren't willing to sacrifice when they can simply trade in their spouse for a new one...kind of like a car.

 

Paul, I think you are just getting old!  ;D  They were saying the same thing in the 70's with free love and all that...you had gritty shows on tv like "The Streets of San Francisco" or "Hawaii Five-0" and movies like "Taxi Driver" and "The Godfather".  Heck, the Stones put out an album called "Sympathy For The Devil!"  The previous generation thought the world was going to hell in a handbasket.  But guess what?  That free-love generation ended up creating the likes of Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Jeff Bezos, etc.  Some of the people who have changed this world for the better...not worse! 

 

Morals aren't in decline.  They have always been the same...with some ebbs and flows.  Culture is fluid and changes with the times, as does what is acceptable and what isn't.  The world for all of its flaws is getting better, not worse.  As Buffett says, your children will live better and longer than you, and their children better than them.  Just think about how much in capital will flow to the world through "The Giving Pledge" alone?  I'm an optimist...it will always be easier to blow ourselves up, but humanity will somehow manage to triumph...and capitalism will not only pave the way, but will be the ONLY way to get there.  Cheers!

 

Haha. I think you might be right, Sanj. I'm getting older and crustier. I'm like Munger...but not as smart or good looking. :P

[ERICOPOLY]

Just think about how much in capital will flow to the world through "The Giving Pledge" alone?

 

It's too bad Berkshire subs can't market their goods as "40+% of profits go to the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation".

 

They basically do, indirectly through Buffett's pledge.

 

[Shane]

I've always been confused by the notion that one system or another is destroying our morals.  Looking back at history I don't understand how anyone can say things are getting worse not better...

 

Have you looked at what's on TV? Divorce rates? Single and unwed parents? Acceptable drug use?

 

A book that talks a bit about the change in culture is "Quiet: The Power of Introverts in a World that Can't Stop Talking." She goes in some depth about how, at one time, we were a culture of character (Buffett's generation and prior). Doing the "right" thing was championed.  Now, we are more of a culture of personality (people like Kim Kardashian). Where we value what gets are attention compared to what's intrinsically motivating.

 

No doubt the world is changing, as it always has.  I think we are in pretty good shape if the biggest moral issues you point out are TV shows, Divorce rates, and Drug use.  Think about the mass atrocities that have occurred in the past.  No doubt they still occur today but I think a lot more is being done to prevent them.

[Guest]

I've always been confused by the notion that one system or another is destroying our morals.  Looking back at history I don't understand how anyone can say things are getting worse not better...

 

Have you looked at what's on TV? Divorce rates? Single and unwed parents? Acceptable drug use?

 

A book that talks a bit about the change in culture is "Quiet: The Power of Introverts in a World that Can't Stop Talking." She goes in some depth about how, at one time, we were a culture of character (Buffett's generation and prior). Doing the "right" thing was championed.  Now, we are more of a culture of personality (people like Kim Kardashian). Where we value what gets are attention compared to what's intrinsically motivating.

 

No doubt the world is changing, as it always has.  I think we are in pretty good shape if the biggest moral issues you point out are TV shows, Divorce rates, and Drug use.  Think about the mass atrocities that have occurred in the past.  No doubt they still occur today but I think a lot more is being done to prevent them.

 

Maybe I'm a cynic, but I'm willing to bet that we ain't seen nothing yet with mass atrocities. :P

[boilermaker75]

So you think that money is the root of all evil?" said Francisco

d'Aconia. .....

 

 

I loved that book, especially that passage.

[Parsad]

I've always been confused by the notion that one system or another is destroying our morals.  Looking back at history I don't understand how anyone can say things are getting worse not better...

 

Have you looked at what's on TV? Divorce rates? Single and unwed parents? Acceptable drug use?

 

A book that talks a bit about the change in culture is "Quiet: The Power of Introverts in a World that Can't Stop Talking." She goes in some depth about how, at one time, we were a culture of character (Buffett's generation and prior). Doing the "right" thing was championed.  Now, we are more of a culture of personality (people like Kim Kardashian). Where we value what gets are attention compared to what's intrinsically motivating.

 

No doubt the world is changing, as it always has.  I think we are in pretty good shape if the biggest moral issues you point out are TV shows, Divorce rates, and Drug use.  Think about the mass atrocities that have occurred in the past.  No doubt they still occur today but I think a lot more is being done to prevent them.

 

Maybe I'm a cynic, but I'm willing to bet that we ain't seen nothing yet with mass atrocities. :P

 

You sure?  12M Russians killed during World War I...Hiroshima...Nagasaki?  We've seen some pretty big atrocities.  Today, with the internet, drones, tracking devices, etc, there is nowhere to hide for the culprits.  Look at Osama...10 years later, they nail him in a house in Pakistan, or the various dictators around the world that have been removed in the last two years through uprisings spread online. 

 

Even imagine what would happen if North Korea did something stupid today?  Forget the Americans jumping all over them, the Chinese and Russians would be on them too.  There is potential for great atrocities to happen, but awareness happens quicker and response time is reduced significantly as well.  Cheers!

[Guest]

I've always been confused by the notion that one system or another is destroying our morals.  Looking back at history I don't understand how anyone can say things are getting worse not better...

 

Have you looked at what's on TV? Divorce rates? Single and unwed parents? Acceptable drug use?

 

A book that talks a bit about the change in culture is "Quiet: The Power of Introverts in a World that Can't Stop Talking." She goes in some depth about how, at one time, we were a culture of character (Buffett's generation and prior). Doing the "right" thing was championed.  Now, we are more of a culture of personality (people like Kim Kardashian). Where we value what gets are attention compared to what's intrinsically motivating.

 

No doubt the world is changing, as it always has.  I think we are in pretty good shape if the biggest moral issues you point out are TV shows, Divorce rates, and Drug use.  Think about the mass atrocities that have occurred in the past.  No doubt they still occur today but I think a lot more is being done to prevent them.

 

Maybe I'm a cynic, but I'm willing to bet that we ain't seen nothing yet with mass atrocities. :P

 

You sure?  12M Russians killed during World War I...Hiroshima...Nagasaki?  We've seen some pretty big atrocities.  Today, with the internet, drones, tracking devices, etc, there is nowhere to hide for the culprits.  Look at Osama...10 years later, they nail him in a house in Pakistan, or the various dictators around the world that have been removed in the last two years through uprisings spread online. 

 

Even imagine what would happen if North Korea did something stupid today?  Forget the Americans jumping all over them, the Chinese and Russians would be on them too.  There is potential for great atrocities to happen, but awareness happens quicker and response time is reduced significantly as well.  Cheers!

 

Yeah, Sanj, I totally think we'll see something worse than the "worse case" scenario. It might be nuclear or biological. Even Buffett and Gates (I believe) have talked about that risk. As the world gets more populated, mass casualties would happen more and more easily. Technology, while awesome a lot of the time, also makes killing a whole lot more effective.

 

http://articles.businessinsider.com/2012-02-27/wall_street/31103069_1_luckiest-person-chemical-attack-cnbc

[hyten1]

for those interested you should read "The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined"

 

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0143122010/ref=oh_details_o01_s00_i00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

 

relative to the past our world is a much much better/safe place. this book was recommended by bill gates.

 

 

[rkbabang]

I've always been confused by the notion that one system or another is destroying our morals.  Looking back at history I don't understand how anyone can say things are getting worse not better...

 

Have you looked at what's on TV? Divorce rates? Single and unwed parents? Acceptable drug use?

 

A book that talks a bit about the change in culture is "Quiet: The Power of Introverts in a World that Can't Stop Talking." She goes in some depth about how, at one time, we were a culture of character (Buffett's generation and prior). Doing the "right" thing was championed.  Now, we are more of a culture of personality (people like Kim Kardashian). Where we value what gets are attention compared to what's intrinsically motivating.

 

No doubt the world is changing, as it always has.  I think we are in pretty good shape if the biggest moral issues you point out are TV shows, Divorce rates, and Drug use.  Think about the mass atrocities that have occurred in the past.  No doubt they still occur today but I think a lot more is being done to prevent them.

 

Maybe I'm a cynic, but I'm willing to bet that we ain't seen nothing yet with mass atrocities. :P

 

You sure?  12M Russians killed during World War I...Hiroshima...Nagasaki?  We've seen some pretty big atrocities.  Today, with the internet, drones, tracking devices, etc, there is nowhere to hide for the culprits.  Look at Osama...10 years later, they nail him in a house in Pakistan, or the various dictators around the world that have been removed in the last two years through uprisings spread online. 

 

Even imagine what would happen if North Korea did something stupid today?  Forget the Americans jumping all over them, the Chinese and Russians would be on them too.  There is potential for great atrocities to happen, but awareness happens quicker and response time is reduced significantly as well.  Cheers!

 

Yeah, Sanj, I totally think we'll see something worse than the "worse case" scenario. It might be nuclear or biological. Even Buffett and Gates (I believe) have talked about that risk. As the world gets more populated, mass casualties would happen more and more easily. Technology, while awesome a lot of the time, also makes killing a whole lot more effective.

 

http://articles.businessinsider.com/2012-02-27/wall_street/31103069_1_luckiest-person-chemical-attack-cnbc

 

I'm closer to Sanjeev's optimism than your pessimism, but I have to admit something like this is at least possible.  And unfortunately every single time Obama's drones kills another person, it becomes just slightly more possible.  People like to pretend that it isn't happening, or that it doesn't effect them, or it's Obama so it's OK.  But killing people has consequences.  I'll repeat that, because so many people do not understand it.  Killing people has consequences.

[Guest]

rk and I hope you and Sanj are right.

 

But if we think about how globalized things are and how quickly technology advances, it could get scary pretty quickly. All we need is a terrorist group to create some type of virus and set it loose on transatlantic flight. Have it incubate for a couple weeks when people have no symptoms...that would help it spread quickly. A few weeks later, people start getting sick. We'd be in trouble and not even know it...until it was too late.

[hyten1]

stahleyp

 

you should read "The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined"

 

you'll be surprise by it

 

as a citizen of the current world due to our hyper media you would think we live in the most dangerous time in history, the truth cannot be more different. i can't do justice to the topic, "The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined" can, that is why its 800 pages :)

 

after reading it you'll find something similar to value investing, that sometimes perception is very far from the truth, similar to a overhype stock or stock destin to die while the opposite eventually happens.

 

 

hy

[rkbabang]

rk and I hope you and Sanj are right.

 

But if we think about how globalized things are and how quickly technology advances, it could get scary pretty quickly. All we need is a terrorist group to create some type of virus and set it loose on transatlantic flight. Have it incubate for a couple weeks when people have no symptoms...that would help it spread quickly. A few weeks later, people start getting sick. We'd be in trouble and not even know it...until it was too late.

 

That is certainly the worst case scenario.  We'd likely never even know it wasn't natural.  A nuke in a city would be more localized, but would be devastating as well.  I don't think the US has quite come to terms with the reality of 4th generation warfare yet.  In other words I don't think the US knows what it is messing with.  I have some hope that the anti-war sentiment in the US will start growing again especially with the younger generation, but because the consequences I mentioned earlier sometimes span generations, the damage could already have been done.

[Guest]

stahleyp

 

you should read "The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined"

 

you'll be surprise by it

 

as a citizen of the current world due to our hyper media you would think we live in the most dangerous time in history, the truth cannot be more different. i can't do justice to the topic, "The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined" can, that is why its 800 pages :)

 

after reading it you'll find something similar to value investing, that sometimes perception is very far from the truth, similar to a overhype stock or stock destin to die while the opposite eventually happens.

 

 

hy

 

Yeah, I'm gonna have to check that one out one of these days. I certainly don't think people are as violent as they once were. Burning witches, public beatings etc carry a bit of social stigma these days. While sad, I don't think the decline of marriage and all that will cause hundreds of millions of deaths or anything. However, like any other "black swan" even, I think the threat is real that someday, perhaps far off, we'll have mass destruction and a loss of human lives bigger than anything we have seen in the past. Just look at the past century, I believe more lives have been lost during these wars than the past several thousand years combined. Yes, there are more people now and there will be more people in the future. More people + technological advancement = higher probability of mass causalities (in my humble opinion). :P

[Parsad]

rk and I hope you and Sanj are right.

 

But if we think about how globalized things are and how quickly technology advances, it could get scary pretty quickly. All we need is a terrorist group to create some type of virus and set it loose on transatlantic flight. Have it incubate for a couple weeks when people have no symptoms...that would help it spread quickly. A few weeks later, people start getting sick. We'd be in trouble and not even know it...until it was too late.

 

True, but the world has been through such plagues.  It might be man-made, but the human race will survive and thrive.  Unless we get hit by a 3 km long asteroid!  ;D  Cheers!

[dowfin1]

Some scientists see discernible and predicable patterns to war and terror. 

 

http://www.psmag.com/culture/the-physics-of-terror-25955/

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/b70eb990-ad40-11e2-b27f-00144feabdc0.html

[hyten1]

stahleyp

 

funny you said this :)

 

" I believe more lives have been lost during these wars than the past several thousand years combined. "

 

you'll be surprise by your statement above after reading the book :)

 

hy

[rkbabang]

Just look at the past century, I believe more lives have been lost during these wars than the past several thousand years combined. Yes, there are more people now and there will be more people in the future.

 

Actually the 20th century wasn't bloody only because of war, more than 6 times more people were murdered in the 20th century outside of both internal and foreign wars by their own governments.  See: 20th century democide.

 

This is the type of thing that Sanjeev was referring to that would be hard for any country to get away with today and it was far and away the most deadly plague of the 20th century.

 

[hyten1]

http://si.wsj.net/public/resources/images/RV-AE377B_VIOLE_G_20110923205702.jpg

[Guest]

Alright, alright, you guys win!  ;D

[hyten1]

for those who don't want to read 800 pages

 

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111904106704576583203589408180.html