WARGASM & War-lust; our devastating genetic disorders by freesingerroy.com C2006
Wargasm? What is it, a dirty joke, or a genetic actuality? Is it in any way related to war & orgasm? Is it built into our genes like orgasm? Wargasm is a genetic war-lust very similar to orgasm for a powerful minority of men & some women. Since the beginnings of our human nature, orgasm & wargasm have been irresistible, irrational impulses in our nature; they cause compulsive tension which we must discharge, or we become somewhat crazed; a minority of men resort to violence in order to discharge the tension in orgasm or wargasm. Orgasm compels us do sexual intercourse which assures the continuation of our human race.
But what about war-lust? Are we compelled to do wargasm by our genes? Methinks yes, but we don’t all have the same strength of compulsion to wargasm, as to orgasm. Wargasm kills; orgasm thrills.
John Keegan, who wrote History of Warfare, said “warriors are always a minority in every culture”; agreed, but warlords & war-lusters have the cultural power & weapons to force their people to obey them when they find a people they believe they can defeat. Why do we still have those war-lust genes & brain faculties within us? Because all cultures before about 8000 BCE were warrior-hunter-herder (fisher-gatherer) cultures. Those warrior genes & mental faculties are still alive & yearning for war within a powerful minority of us.
I was proud to fight in WW2, a very young 1st Lt, full of war lust, but when that war ended my warrior genes were burnt out; so were nearly all of my friends. We went back to civilian life eagerly; we wanted no more war. The military, corporate, & political warlords found an enemy, the USSR, but they were too strong, not like Grenada, Vietnam, Guatemala, Iran, Iraq, little countries seemingly easy to defeat.
Why do some young men in every advanced culture go to officer schools, like West Point to build a career, to become high-ranking officers, hopefully Generals [admirals are generals on ships]. Is it because they love their countries more than the rest of us civilians; methinks history proves not. Generals Eisenhower, Patton, MacArthur wanted to be officers from earliest childhood. Ike did not come from a military family, from a devout farming family; he just had the warrior desire engorged in his system, MacArthur came from a zealous military family, his father was a Civil War general, & his mother was an ardent militarist who plagued the War Dept for promotions for her adored son, she lived her war-lust through her husband & son.
Gen Patton came from a wealthy California family; a military family, though none had become famous. He married a wealthy heiress, thus he never had any financial shortages; he could pursue his war-lust without thinking of supporting his wife & daughters, or of spending family time with them. He was very irascible when he wasn’t at war; euphoric when he was commanding men to fight, kill, & die. I remember a scene in a documentary of Patton, looking down lovingly at a dying young officer he said, “Goddam me, but I do love it,” meaning war. War gives war-lovers the lawful right to kill other human beings, as they cannot in civilian life.
Now I am an ex-warrior, 82, just trying to understand the wars we have lived thru. I can’t write a long book; my body is old & sickly with PC, but my mind is still very spry, I have a 7 book reference library on my computer, plus online search, & I have a good memory & empirical intellect.
Does the war-lust of 3 famous generals prove that a powerful minority of people in every culture have warglust genes alive & yearning within them? No, but if we look far back into our human history there is ample evidence to prove my empirical argumentum.
Before 8000 BCE all the men in the world were raised to be warriors; the tribe had to have ample supplies of warriors in order to combat other tribes that coveted the same water, land, animals, fruit & veggies that thrived at water sites. Animals, vegetables, & humans have always grown along water sites. Conflict broke out between tribes, [& animals] over these natural resources. 140,000 years ago, the mutations that created Homo sapiens happened in the watered lands of east Africa, all of our forebears lived in the area of the Omo River valley, & along Kenya & Tanganyika where there was warm climate & plenty of water running down from the great lakes atop the Great Rift Valley; many were the rivers & lakes; look at the Victoria, Turkana area on a map, you will see how our forbears traveled from water to water after the Ice Age receded about 15,000 BCE; ‘til they filled all the livable areas of the earth.
Many were forced by conflict into nearly unlivable areas, like Mongolia, into the high, cold, lands north of the Gobi Desert & east of the Altai Mountains. A very hard land where warrior-hunter-herder tribes developed into very belligerent warriors. The Mongols & their Tatar allies are an excellent example of genetic-cultural warrior tribes. They fought among themselves, until Genghis Kahn, [1167-r.1206-1222] eldest son of a powerful tribal ruler united all the tribes into a fighting force which terrorized & conquered nearly all of China, & later under his sons & grandsons nearly all of what is today, Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, all of the lands from the China Sea to Turkey & from the Arabian Gulf to the northern tundra of Siberia. Until 1480, the Tatars ruled southern Russia, ‘til Ivan III, Grand Duke of Moscow refused to pay them homage. At Ain Jalut, 1260, in modern Syria, the Mongols were finally defeated by the Mamelukes of Egypt, also horse warriors with the composite bow; the Mongols were forced back to China & Mongolia; partly because their thousands of horses ate out the grasslands of the western Steppes. After the death of their great general Attila in 453-4, their power was broken by Byzantine forces & lack of grass for their horses. They joined other warrior bands & were lost in history.
Why & how did a small group of warrior tribes become such a powerful force? Genghis Kahn was a military & political genius, but he could not have made all the contentious tribes of Mongolia obey his command. They had to have been eager genetic & cultural warriors already. They had already developed small, rugged, shaggy horses, & the “weapon of mass destruction”, for a thousand years the composite [Cupid’s] bow; until the gunpowder revolution in the 13th century destroyed its power. Would they have done so, if they were just peaceful hunter-herders? No, definitely not! Would they have united suddenly into a powerful military force if they had not had warrior genes? They were warriors by nature, genes, heredity; take your pick of concepts. Not every Mongol & Tatar was an active warrior; experts had to specialize in the construction of the composite bow, which was a composite of bone, wood, animal ligament glues, etc, it took about 2 years for the whole bow to dry to its final form & power; it could shoot arrows 200 yards with accuracy & penetrating power. Other non-warriors had to be expert herders & butchers, women had to be fur weavers, perhaps they cooperated in the making of the very sharp bone tipped, ½ ounce arrows. And they were collectors of arrows after the battle or massacre. [Lepanto, 1571]
All throughout recorded & archaeological history there have been very cruel tribal warlords & warriors, Attila & the Huns, the Ottoman Turks, the Aztecs of Mexico, the Spanish Conquistadores, the Maoris before the European invasion, Christian warriors during WW1, & WW2, the list is almost endless; now we see American genetic warriors fighting Muslim genetic warriors, Israelis fighting Muslims, Muslims fighting Muslims in Afghanistan & Iraq; Oh, I just remembered the sadistic Gaiseric & his Vandals, and the Roman Legions, the Nazis of that time to their opponents, they loved to use crucifixion, feeding to lions, killing by gladiators, flagellation; Oh, I almost forgot Alaric & the Visigoths; perhaps Cyrus the Great was one of the least cruel warlord-kings; how did the Spartans become a total warrior society; like Shaka’s [1787-1828] Zulu warriors, part of the peaceful Unguni tribes until he organized & unleashed his fury on the other tribes & whites; a very cruel warlord to his own people & the peaceful Unguni tribes. For every warlord & war-lustful tribe we can name hundreds more, & humans are still that way in Iraq, Lebanon, Afghanistan. Are our ‘brave’ soldiers in Islamland fighting to save our country from invasion? Or are all the homosapes fighting for natural resources & the joy of killing? What think ye?