[extropy-chat] 'History' and the fulcrum of 1945

[Keith Henson]

At 10:45 AM 29/01/05 +0100, Amara (one of my favorite people) wrote:

>A couple of years ago,  I read a brilliant book that successfully
>conveyed what a complex arena is 'history'. The book _Walking
>Since Daybreak_ by historian Modris Ekstein tells the story of
>the Baltic countries before, during, and after World War II. He
>chose Spring 1945 as the (obvious) climax of his story,

snip

>Before we can move forward, we must come to some kind of terms
>with 1945, with what it represents. A start would be the
>recognition that 1945, with its devastation, displacement, and
>horror, was the result not just of a few madmen and their
>befuddled followers, not just of 'others,' but of humanity as a
>whole

Bingo.  The result of psychological traits that evolved during the long 
period of the stone age.

>and of our culture as a whole.

Since wars seem to be a feature of all cultures, he must have been talking 
"culture" in the generic sense.  I actually don't think culture has much to 
do with why we have wars.

>Nineteen forty-five is not
>our victory, as we often like to think; 1945 is our problem.

And *why* hasn't there been another major war in Europe in the last 60 years?

I think I know why.

What are your suggestions?

Keith Henson