I'll try this here now because Zig Forums apparently can't handle getting told otherwise:

Peace time is a prelude to conflict. This next conflict will probably be one of the worst in history since it's another possible mass extinction event that will shape the Earth's biosphere for many centuries after.
Nevertheless, the amount of conflict deaths has nothing to do with the quality of life people have, and it could really just be making things worse because in some conflict zones it might be better to die than to survive. What kind of quality of life is there when you're totally damaged and crippled and left in total poverty?

Social turmoil is inevitable. It's purely a logistical outcome of cities being unlivable, famines/droughts (which are HAPPENING now), and the incompetent outcomes of the ruling classes' mismanagement and scheming.
It's a good thing though… if the species doesn't go extinct, we may very well learn and adapt to the occasion. The worst possible thing that could happen is some bizarre eco-serfdom under an eco-fascist regime and a slow march to death. If the death march is slow, that leaves more time to build towards revolution still.

Pretty soon everyone will be living in squalor.

HDI is pure ideological number fixing divorced from real conditions. Go swim in the Ganges, friendo. See how you like it. Go see the e-recycling centers in any African country that will allow them. See if the burning trash and choked waterways of such countries are worthy of your personal standards.

Attached: 1506988566265.jpg (1530x2048, 903.15K)

I'm drunk. Sorry for being a rude asshole.

The problem with those kinds of comparisons is that it's not based on any data. If you could make a study where trash times person over time, then there might be a point. But a story thought up isn't. If you have any valid studies that show that living conditions in developing countries are really going south, then please show me.

Not if you live in the Middle East.

The middle east is an exception. War has been going down elsewhere in the world except for the middle east.

Insofar as wars and deaths are concerned, it's difficult to extrapolate future trends based on the current data. Deaths from majors wars necessarily do not occur as a relative constant over years but rather supervene upon the "background noise." It's entirely possible another significant war won't occur, but it's also entirely possible one will. Such a war isn't something that would be predicted by this sort of statistical calculation.

It's at least true that homicide rates per year have been gradually decreasing in the West, though.

Also, it should be noted that the downturn after the 90s is related to the abeyance of inter-superpower struggles after the fall of the Soviet Union. This cannot safely be regarded as a permanent state of affairs.

sage

Nice, so we are on the same page then.

Any point to add to your thread?

Two things:

1. If the Nazis had won WWII, there would also be "peace", as after killing everyone the Nazis would be left unopposed. Your graphs tell nothing about the quality of people's lives, especially as "homicide rates" excludes legal murder.

2. It is almost always true that at any point in time all previous points in time were "worse." As says, all of this is useless to the question of what to do. There are always reactionary forces seeking to take us back in time that must be opposed.

Attached: american-antiterrorism.jpg (720x852, 142.99K)

That's exactly my point. Too many people think that yesterday is better than today, even when it is obviously not the case. I don't know how bad it's on this board, but on Zig Forums it's definitely the case.