Would you agree that modern regimes are, as a whole, nicer, that historical ones? Why is that? Is it a good thing?
During the Napoleonic wars, which of the two main powers, England and France, were 'nicer' to the other powers of Europe?
To me there is a civilisational floor of 'incivility' below which the returns of cruelty are infinitely higher than above it. This is due to focus of states tending outside of its borders as its own stability, be it Republican longevity or Monarchic pedigree, increases. Or, to put it another way, when you have a group of neighbouring states that are primarily concerned with internal affairs, the likelihood of collective action to punish (/exploit their weakness for personal gain) any one is less likely. Cruelty gives a great excuse for intervention.
p
Would you agree that modern regimes are, as a whole, nicer, that historical ones? Why is that? Is it a good thing? During the Napoleonic wars, which of the two main powers, England and France, were 'nicer' to the other powers of Europe?
To me there is a civilisational floor of 'incivility' below which the returns of cruelty are infinitely higher than above it. This is due to focus of states tending outside of its borders as its own stability, be it Republican longevity or Monarchic pedigree, increases. Or, to put it another way, when you have a group of neighbouring states that are primarily concerned with internal affairs, the likelihood of collective action to punish (/exploit their weakness for personal gain) any one is less likely. Cruelty gives a great excuse for intervention.
More options
Context Copy link