technology and war

Technology has replaced war as the major disruptor of our lives. People forget that war, like technology (and of course one often hastens the other) has many benefits for some people - the 'war profiteers'. We have a small group of technology profiteers too, and the rest of us who buy into tech when it is in the nascent phase (one car on an empty road) and then realise we are stuck with it (living in a commuter suburb with no public transport and traffic jams all the time). Tech that makes things easier rather than harder (exercise machines, brain trainers) will inevitably allow more and more people to do that thing. This causes TRAFFIC. Traffic makes money for LAMPHREYS (people who hang on and bleed a moving entity dry) but causes a headache for everyone else. In the end we find new tech or a new form of SOCORG (social organisation) to deal with TRAFFIC. This might include the recluse lives of people in Cairo suburbs ('social life is over' one matter of fact resident told me about his new villa based existence in sixth of october city) replaced by the odd social event and a lot of time alone in a darkened room with a glowing computer screen. The main mode of Malthusian malcontent (4Ms!) is ever increasing traffic and the concommittent traffic jam. Immigration is of course excess traffic leading to the real traffic jams on the orbital roads of the city- eventually. 

War causes traffic through displacement driven by fear. Technology causes traffic through greed- easier, cheaper, faster- we want it now and we'll move to get it, and the second order benefits too. War causes traffic much faster than technology used to, but tech is speeding up and spreading everywhere much faster now and is embedded in influential cultural institutions it is hard to avoid such as schools and universities. The main casualties in war are physical, the main casualties of technology traffic are mental. Hence the mental health crisis.

Just as there are conscientious objectors to war there are people who increasingly distrust technology. The resistance to war happens when the concerns of the populace are basic- food and shelter. The resistance to technology starts when we reject increased traffic in every area. This happens when there are no more benefits to be had in the usual areas of increasing wealth and increasing possibility. When the zone of possibility increases in non-tech areas (learning foraging, learning how to make fire with a bow drill, making art, running, cooking) the vital attention of humans shifts. Technology ceases to attract the well rounded 'normal' person and becomes of interest only to those who over strongly desire power and money. Traffic makes money but it becomes a waste disposal problem. Traffic becomes a sewerage problem. The plan shifts from expanding the city to building the infrastructure to allow a certain kind of expansion. The profiteers work in reducing waste, finding betters ways to make waste disappear. In the end the big money is in the waste disposal industry.

Is there an end to war? Small wars persist but big wars no longer happen where technology is well entrenched and has disrupted social organisation to the extent of shattering tribal loyalties. Is there an end to tech invasions? Will everyone turn their back on tech?