Duke of Qin Profile picture
Sep 24, 2020 10 tweets 2 min read Read on X
The idea of “Just War” is neither a hallmark of Christianity or actually designed to prevent civilian casualties. Rather “Just War” is the logical outcome of the Whig/Liberal dialectic and by innate design, if not intent, encourages totalizing wars of annihilation.
Total war isn’t actually a modern concept, it is actually an ancient and primitive one. The complete destruction of an opposing group was the de-facto way of war since man was using wood clubs and flint spears. Even with the arrival of Christianity, this didn’t change much since
the default method of warfare in Europe up into the late middle ages from the collapse of the Roman Empire was the Chevauchee, i.e. the civilian massacre. The big break actually came following the bloodletting of the Thirty Years War and the new European balance of power that
lasted up until the beginning of the 20th century. The general trend of European warfare from the late 17th century onwards were characterized by frequency but remarkably few casualties both military and civilian given the number of combatants involved.
What generally happened was when once side was losing, they would surrender en mass or retreat and the other side would accept it and not murder all the captives as generally tended to happen before. The reason why wars became less bloody at this time was not because of morals
but rather because war became legitimized for all parties involved. That is to say following Westphalia, notions of justice were simply irrelevant and wars became more like sporting contests. Sure you lost round one, but there is always next season and when all parties accepted
the legitimacy of state aggression, the costs of losing wars became less onerous for the participants and thus the incentive to completely annihilate the others in an all or nothing gambit disappears. “Just War” on the other hand returns us back to the earlier era where
the legitimacy of all parties involved is not de facto acknowledged. Instead of recognizing winners and losers of political contests, it sees only the “Righteous” and the “Criminal”. Upholders of the so-called International Order and breakers of the Peace.
Paradoxically, “Just War” theory rather than preventing conflicts which arises from differences in interests, serves to maximize grudges and encourage escalation. When all parties see one another as illegitimate enemies instead of competing agents the stakes become all the higher
and chancy wars of annihilation and the resultant civilian massacres become all the more certain. This line of reasoning is simply alien to neocons and liberal interventionists not simply because they are over credentialed halfwits but also because they are dishonest about goals.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Duke of Qin

Duke of Qin Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @qin_duke

May 19
Globalization as it was meant to happen was supposed to be Western firms exporting production to less developed countries but keeping ownership and knowledge so that it retained 95% of the profits while cutting costs in half, while simultaneously importing their best workers.
Fair enough trade for the very poor locations where production was relocated where even 5% was a very good deal and losing their brightest wasn't so much of a loss as their economies couldn't make productive use of them. Ridiculously good deal for the West though on paper. What
ended up happening in practice was something else entirely. Western firms did retain the lion's share of the profits in virtually every country they set up shop and didn't face any real competition except in one gigantic exception. Production in China resulted in the creation of
Read 8 tweets
Apr 16
Western economists wondering why Chinese firms can have low profit margins and simultaneously be so competitive never stops being funny to me. Like they have magically forgotten the sina qua non of Capitalism which is that firms competing for profit maximizes overall welfare for
the greatest number of people possible. They operate under the parameters of American finance capitalism where the goal is to maximize profits for shareholders. The industries with the lowest profit margins are those with the most competitive pressure, low barriers to entry, and
highest customer satisfaction for the strongest competition. The value added in this case is not captured by the owners of capital directly but by their customers. The industries with the highest margins are de facto the least competitive, more vulnerable to disruption and have
Read 4 tweets
Oct 20, 2023
I've become ever more convinced that the primary reason the US perennially underestimates Chinese capabilities is because quixotically, the smartest whites gather in DC. More than any other city, DC is home to by far the most educated, credentialed, and talented white Americans.
on the other hand the Chinese that make it in DC are at best average (for Chinese) because the smarter and more ambitious ones know they have absolutely zero future there and avoid it, leaving little more than striving teachers pet suck ups. This combination of white excellence
and Chinese mediocrity exists in the singular city of Washington DC and nowhere else in America. It is only natural that the immediacy bias of DC wordcels would see the Chinese as being easily brought to heel via their professional wordcelling with which they are without equal.
Read 4 tweets
Oct 12, 2023
Liberalism is fundamentally an ideology of great privilege similar to noblesse oblige. It can really only exist under conditions of gross material and social disparity. Unlike the aristocrats superiority which was baked into their bones, the bourgeoisie's Liberal sensibilities
are ephemeral and brittle because their socio-economic position is much more precarious. They can be easily cancelled by social censure far more readily than someone with land rents and armed retainers. It is why whenever Liberal societies undergo even the slightest stress or
or even worse go into decline, Liberal ideas are jettisoned almost immediately for fascist ones in order to restore the status imbalance that is required to sustain pretensions of Liberal superiority. It is why you are seeing so many shit libs going more and more mask off. To
Read 7 tweets
Sep 6, 2023
One thing that I've noticed is that despite the number of people claiming programming degrees in India being prodigious, there are almost zero Indian video game developers or really an industry to speak of despite absolutely zero barriers to entry. The most prominent example of
video game development being outsourced to India was the textbook disaster that was the cancelled Prince of Persia title. You would think that with such a huge young market there would be more local entrepreneurs trying to earn money from it. It isn't even a situation of relative
privation as video games are possibly the cheapest form of entertainment on a price/hr ratio. In China, during the late 90s, when much poorer than India today and much lower rates of internet penetration managed to create an ecosystem of video games despite the rampant piracy.
Read 5 tweets
Jul 22, 2023
The real black pill of Western government dysfunction isn't that everything is happening by mistake or malevolence, but rather the present state was the historic inevitability of Liberalism combined with people actually trying to immanentize their ideology. The communists attempt
to make their revolutionary vision was very real and very enthusiastic. The more enthusiastic, the more disastrous. Ultimately Liberalism stems from the same branch and moves slower, making changes only so fast as bourgeois society is willing to tolerate but they were heading in
the same direction even if the paths diverged. It's errors only now becoming more evident. The current generation of Western leader's problems is not with their cynicism or duplicity, but rather their sincerity. All elites have tended to place their own interests paramount over
Read 6 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(