The article is actually somehow worse than the headline. It looks at things on a scale of thousands of years, and the argument is essentially "war happened, the conditions of humanity improved, ergo war is good". Then it's just filler, mostly name dropping events and famous works, literally distracting you from the fact that it's a dog shit argument by going "oh you think my argument is dumb? Well I'm smart so how could that be?"
Wonder if this guy would be open to saying "over the last 30 years inequality has gone up while the welfare state has undergone crushing austerity and union participation has declined - ergo, neoliberalism has been bad for most people." Or if he has a bunch of different ad hoc explanations.