Robert Gentel wrote:
Not all research is equal. I'm looking for ability to do historic research about politically polemic matters, if I were trying to gauge mathematical ability then golf balls would make more sense.
All right, you got me there. Good point.
There certainly doesn't lack for strong opinions about things like whether a war should be waged or not, or whether a country should be increasing the number of people it kills or not. But these opinions increasingly seem to me to have been formulated in the complete absence of any form of hard data.
I think most of us suffer from the handicap of being confined to our own perspective. And when it comes to matters like this, a person really only 'knows'
what he wants to know. If that's the case, it's not hard to believe that people can form some dubious opinions. And I'm not at all excluding myself in the least...
In that case,in my lifetime I'd guess the US has:
- Actively killed less people than 150 years ago
- Passively killed more than 150 years ago
What I meant there is that from my perspective, the US is intentionally
killing less people (at least percentage wise) than it was 150 years ago. I'm also taking in to account civilian killings - things like sales of tobacco, alcohol and the like; malpractice, good old fashioned murders...
Now I realize that the fact I don't feel the need to lament every unnecessary death may make me callous. And the fact that I don't feel particularly inclined to do the exact math in order to come to the conclusion that things seem relatively better now than they used to be - re intentional killing, may also make me callous. Am I mistaken? possibly. But this is the under-informed opinion I have.