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?"

  • zifnab25 [he/him, any]
    ·
    4 years ago

    "Us"

    Doing a lot of heavy lifting with that one.

    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”.

    I never would have become so good at hop-scotch if I hadn't had a leg sawed off at the knee when I was 13. Clearly, we live in the best of all possible worlds.

    • Segorinder [any]
      ·
      4 years ago

      Really it's also saying "I never would have gotten taller and less pimply and angsty than I was when I was 13."