war is peace
For general context, the opinion piece was published April 2014. Bezos owned The WaPo at the time and had since 2013. Author is Stanford historian and archaeologist Ian Morris.
this post was submitted on 05 Mar 2026
496 points (97.7% liked)
196
6233 readers
1270 users here now
Community Rules
You must post before you leave
Be nice. Assume others have good intent (within reason).
Block or ignore posts, comments, and users that irritate you in some way rather than engaging. Report if they are actually breaking community rules.
Use content warnings and/or mark as NSFW when appropriate. Most posts with content warnings likely need to be marked NSFW.
Most 196 posts are memes, shitposts, cute images, or even just recent things that happened, etc. There is no real theme, but try to avoid posts that are very inflammatory, offensive, very low quality, or very "off topic".
Bigotry is not allowed, this includes (but is not limited to): Homophobia, Transphobia, Racism, Sexism, Abelism, Classism, or discrimination based on things like Ethnicity, Nationality, Language, or Religion.
Avoid shilling for corporations, posting advertisements, or promoting exploitation of workers.
Proselytization, support, or defense of authoritarianism is not welcome. This includes but is not limited to: imperialism, nationalism, genocide denial, ethnic or racial supremacy, fascism, Nazism, Marxism-Leninism, Maoism, etc.
Avoid AI generated content.
Avoid misinformation.
Avoid incomprehensible posts.
No threats or personal attacks.
No spam.
Moderator Guidelines
Moderator Guidelines
- Don’t be mean to users. Be gentle or neutral.
- Most moderator actions which have a modlog message should include your username.
- When in doubt about whether or not a user is problematic, send them a DM.
- Don’t waste time debating/arguing with problematic users.
- Assume the best, but don’t tolerate sealioning/just asking questions/concern trolling.
- Ask another mod to take over cases you struggle with, if you get tired, or when things get personal.
- Ask the other mods for advice when things get complicated.
- Share everything you do in the mod matrix, both so several mods aren't unknowingly handling the same issues, but also so you can receive feedback on what you intend to do.
- Don't rush mod actions. If a case doesn't need to be handled right away, consider taking a short break before getting to it. This is to say, cool down and make room for feedback.
- Don’t perform too much moderation in the comments, except if you want a verdict to be public or to ask people to dial a convo down/stop. Single comment warnings are okay.
- Send users concise DMs about verdicts about them, such as bans etc, except in cases where it is clear we don’t want them at all, such as obvious transphobes. No need to notify someone they haven’t been banned of course.
- Explain to a user why their behavior is problematic and how it is distressing others rather than engage with whatever they are saying. Ask them to avoid this in the future and send them packing if they do not comply.
- First warn users, then temp ban them, then finally perma ban them when they break the rules or act inappropriately. Skip steps if necessary.
- Use neutral statements like “this statement can be considered transphobic” rather than “you are being transphobic”.
- No large decisions or actions without community input (polls or meta posts f.ex.).
- Large internal decisions (such as ousting a mod) might require a vote, needing more than 50% of the votes to pass. Also consider asking the community for feedback.
- Remember you are a voluntary moderator. You don’t get paid. Take a break when you need one. Perhaps ask another moderator to step in if necessary.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Thanks for sharing the link in the interest of fact and transparency.
I looked at the premise of his book that this article seems to connect with, and it basically boils down to "History shows that societies becomes a lot more peaceful and productive after periods of war."
Wow, who'd've thought that things get better for the people who survive a war? It's a good thing we can apply survivorship bias to the whole of human history with such confidence like that.
So it's not that war makes things better, but that we become better off after we stop fighting? We become better off after we decide fixing our problems peacefully is a good idea? Brilliant.
It's also not true when you consider all the times war follows war and societies see decades if not centuries of decline involving numerous civil wars. On top of that, when war is not devastating for those that start it, it does not inspire them to change; rather it becomes part of their norm.
load more comments
(3 replies)
He seems like not a great guy.
Of course it was WAPO
It says it right at the top ...
WTF this is a real article
Artist putting the dove of peace in there should be shamed, too. Mf’er thinks they have some design porn going on there when all it is is selling out to oppressors
I will do one better and provide a link to an archived copy of the article so you all can read it for yourselves!
load more comments
(3 replies)
Define "us".
Us, the wealthiest owners of Raytheon and Lockheed shares. Who did you think?
US...A
“When we talk about U.S.A., we ain’t talkin bout you, ése.”
Probably the author of the article and the people who paid him to write it.
load more comments
(1 replies)
"Democracy dies in darkness, and we're on the side of darkness"
Democracy dies in darkness
This stopped being a warning and started being a mission statement.
Right up there with Google's "Don't be Evil"
load more comments
(1 replies)
Democracy died in daylight
So, not agreeing with the premise but: this article is from 2014, written by a legit historian, and is specifically not discussing the short term.
Their premise is effectively that war consolidates power and minimizes violence at scale inside the unified territory afterwards. Further, the things nations do to be ready for conflict, like build roads, administrative statates and all the social structures that accompany a standing army facilitate trade and prosperity.
It's less that he's arguing for war, and more just ... Describing the historical consequences of war in aggregate.
It was certainly only titled the way it was because he was publishing a book and this is more eye catching.
Ironic that this post is trying critize propaganda while being a bit propagandish itself
Yeah it thinks it's counterpropaganda, but it's just propaganda.
I agree with it of course: we shouldn't need war to build roads.
load more comments
(1 replies)
And this is the newspaper that played a major role in bringing Nixon down at the time... what an utter disgrace.
Probably not for ethical reasons but more uhh aristocratic in-group disputes/conflicts of interest.
This right here, and he was never taken down. He voluntarily resigned and faced zero consequences.
Did a war write this article?
Just a neoliberal entering his pupae to begin turning into a fascist.
load more comments
(2 replies)
Yeah, I mean, what it said. Genocide! Love that. I respect The Washington Post and its commitment to corruption, abuse of power, and harm to kids.
What the fuck.
The first thing to die in war is the truth.
I didn't even see the WaPo part of the post at first... and I didn't need to.
Did someone say Blowback?
if by "us" they mean the billionaries behind this company then sure it does
AT WHAT FUCKING COST?!?!?
Go walk in the rain some more, you’ll dry quicker.
"Yeah because after WWII there was peace!!!1"
Technically, after the war is before the war.
Am I the only one that sees a Wehrmact soldier with an MP-40 in hand? Like... Come on.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Pictured dove ofc carrying cluster bombs.
Even if true, there has to be a better way to achieve safety and economic security for all. War causes losses for far too many.
ETA: grammar & clarity
At the cost of murdering others and taking what is theirs.
Keep in mind that this is a guest opinion, which means it is not intended to reflect the official opinion of the Washington Post—in fact, it might be the opposite, but published anyway in order to provide a diversity of viewpoints. (Personally, I do not like everyone they have chosen to platform, but it is not unreasonable for them to want to err on the side of listening to what the other side has to say to avoid creating an echo chamber.)
Nah fuck that, that's like posting straight Nazi gibberish and playing the "representing both sides" argument when someone calls you on it. In this day and age that whole idea can go fuck itself right into oblivion. We are all grown enough to known the difference.
load more comments
(6 replies)
Nonsense. The "it's just opinion" canard is so tired, please just let it die. By publishing an opinion in a well regarded (deservedly or not) news outlet, they launder ideas into mainstream acceptability by announcing that a reasonable person could hold such an opinion. A reasonable person can not hold such an opinion as this. If it was published with a warning and an analysis of how dangerous this is and to make people aware of how the extreme right thinks, that would be one thing. But publishing an opinion without comment is endorsement, no matter how much people say it isn't.
Bezos changed the editorial line of the paper so that conflicting views are not allowed.
Imperialist wars are, in fact, a pillar of neoliberalism, so of course they support it. They also make you richer, as the title claims, if you're the propaganda appendage of a fascist regime, or own stocks in military corporations.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(5 replies)
Of courses it does, especially when you are the world's biggest arms dealer! By far, not even China, Russia, and Germany combined, throw in UK and France, too
Well, shit...
Somebody turned off the lights at Washington Post then lol
view more: next ›