How to stop the endless cycle of wars

 Executive Summary.

1) Declare war a crime against humanity. War is a barbaric, in humane activity that only brings misery destruction and death. It always produces victims. There are no war crimes, war is a crime.

2) Brand all those that propose or start wars as political failures who cannot solve their problems by normal peaceful methods of respect, tolerance, negotiation and compromise.  

3) Promote democracy, free speech and an independent judiciary. This will allow the people and courts to kick out leaders who propose the use violence.

4) Promote equal rights for women and feminism. Men are far more violent than women, and women with power keep violent men in check. Women should shun violent men.

5) Promote atheism. If we stopped believing in a life after death, perhaps we will value all our lives on earth much more and stop killing. If we stopped believing in gods then perhaps we would accept that we are responsible for all the horrors of violence and stop.

6) Show the true horror of war. TV and social media should not be censored so all can see the truth of war, and demand it stops.

7) Stop glorifying war. We need to change our culture especially for our children, so violence is seen as something barbaric and shameful.

8) Recognise that violence is used by low status people as a short cut to gain status for themselves, their clans, country or religion. But in the long term violence is no solution to problems which can only really be solved by self improvement.

9) Acknowledge that use of violence always creates victims. People of violence conveniently ignore the misery, destruction, suffering and death they create.

10) Acknowledge a fundamental human right that an individual does not need to follow an order that causes the suffering of others.

11) Acknowledge that human beings are tribal in nature, but this is useless in today’s globalised world. If we loose our tribal habits and start thinking as members of a single global tribe, we might realise that we have only been fighting ourselves and there is no "other" to fight.

12) Acknowledge that we should not just do the easiest thing for ourselves but can and must choose to do the right thing for the good of everyone. Don't be a bystander - stand up to those who promote the use of violence against others.

13) We must learn to care and support each other, (with out exclusion) or humanity is destined to suffer violence and wars forever more.   

Why War?

When I was a teenager, someone punched me in the face. I was a bit surprised and shocked but I just stared back at him. This wasn't what my assailant expected. He just looked sheepish and didn’t know what to do, so I walked off as if nothing had happened. When I got home I burst out crying - my nose really hurt!

Violence in all its forms is fundamentally about status, whether it be national leaders wanting to maintain or raise a nations status, religious leaders promoting wars to maintain or increase the status of their beliefs or kids fighting in the streets to get them up the pecking order. The kid that punched me in the face wanted to show how big he was to his mates. Putin wants to demonstrate to everyone what a great leader he is and religious leaders want to gain status for their faith and get status in the kingdom of heaven for doing their gods work.

People use violence because they think they can benefit from it and win at  little cost to themselves. But there are alternative ways to gain status. These methods take longer and are much harder work but create a better world for everyone because there are no victims. However, when people think they can win a fight they get greedy and use violence as a short cut to gain status quickly. They may justify violence by saying that they are making the world a better place, but what they mean is they are making their world better, not everyone's world better. The suffering of victims is conveniently ignored.

Why is status so important? I think it is all due to our basic biological drive to reproduce - high status means better offspring. It all boils down to sex in the end. (Even those fighting religious wars enrich themselves and their families and often enslave and rape). But this is no excuse, as unlike other animals, we have a large frontal cortex which gives us the capacity to assess the future implications of  our actions. Also, we all have the freedom to choose our actions, if we make the effort to use our free will and don't just follow the herd. We all have the mental capacity to do the right thing, rather than the easiest thing*.

So I say violence is never justified, but is here to stay until humans learn it is no solution to problems, and just shows how incapable someone is at gaining status through self improvement, co operation, mutual respect, generosity and the ability to compromise. People also need to learn to stand up to power and not just do what their group leaders tell them. In the long run, history tell us time and and again that other strategies are much more successful than use of violence. Deep down, we all know war is morally wrong and that peace is better than war.

However, back when I was teenager, I managed to throw the school bully across the cloak room and my status increased no end!! If violence starts, a show of strength is justified to keep those who propose violence in check. 

(*For example in places such as Italy and Japan, population numbers are falling.Humans are demonstrating that they have the ability to exert conscious control over family size, which is counter to the evolutionary imperative to reproduce as frequently as possible, as animals do.)

Do humans live in a world of delusion?

After eleven years of reliable service, my diesel car is on its last legs, so it's  off to the local dealers to see whats available. As fossil fuels are clearly wrecking the planet, my next car will be electric. 

One dealer was busy, and had no staff to help us. The other we visited was empty, with great staff, but it didn't open on a Sunday and all their cars where over priced. A 30 second search on the internet could save me 10% on their prices. With another leading EV manufacturer, I rang the number trying to find out the waiting time from order to delivery and got an automated machine, of which none of the options applied. 

So my impression is that one dealer is losing sales because he thinks he can sell cars with out staff, one hasn't realised he is competing with the internet, and the other thinks computers have all the answers. Are they all deluded, closing their eyes to the real world?

Currently in America, one half of the country will be voting for a very shady crook, who just speaks rubbish with no idea or regard for consequences. What are Americans thinking? Are they all totally deluded? Do they really think these people are fit to run their country?

Here in the UK, we continue to call ourselves "Great" Britain even though we continue to get poorer and rack up the national dept so we will soon be bankrupt. Who do we think we are fooling?

In Russia, Putin is repeating all the mistakes made by leaders of the past and using unrestrained violence for his own benefit. What do Russians do? Nothing. Can't they see that fighting a pointless war only achieves misery , destruction and death. Do they think war is better than peace? Are they all totally brainwashed by Putin's propaganda? Are they all totally deluded that Putin is making Russian great?

In China, the Ruling elite, the Chinese Communist Party, tells the people it is working to create the Socialist Utopia, whilst living in luxury generated by the profits of western capitalists exploiting underpaid Chinese  workers. Why do the Chinese do nothing?  Are they all ants that cannot think for themselves and see the reality? Are 1.4 billion Chinese really all deluded and believe they don't need to think as the CCP knows best and its working for their greater good?

In Israel / Palestine both sides think violence is the solution, whilst the evidence is plain for all to see' Why are they so blind?

And when it comes to man made climate change, the effects are clear and the urgency to act very apparent. The science makes it unavoidable what the future world will be like. Do the vast majority accept this and act in the best interests of humanity and all the other creatures in the world? No. Emissions keep rising. Once again people choose delusion over reality. 

I've called this blog "Make the world a better place" and try to write plainly and simply as to what the reality of human nature and the world is, and therefore help readers see the world as it is so they can make better decisions for the benefit of all. Can I, a nobody from Sheffield, change the world by posting short essays? Who do I think I am?  

Will my purchase of an electric car make the world a better place? I could live with out a car, but others rely on my driving so I will be buying one. But am I deluding myself? My single decision wont make a jot of difference to global emissions, 

But if everyone started to face up to reality, rather than delude themselves they can just sit back and do nothing or keep doing the same old thing, the effect would be massive and we will all be a lot better off.

Well, that's my delusion. but is it better or worse than yours?!!!

The Past is dead - face up to reality for a brighter future

 I’ve read a lot of history books, but whilst its been interesting to learn how people behaved and dealt with past problems, the study of history is of little practical use. Because the world today is not the world of yesterday, you cannot just keep doing the same thing, just because it may have worked in the past.

Putin, when interviewed by Tucker, gave a half hour history lecture to justify his invasion of Ukraine. It’s a shame that the Ukraine and Russia of the past no longer exist, and his use of history (however he  sees it) to make decisions today is fundamentally wrong. The world continually changes and these changes cannot be ignored in any decision making process. If you do, eventually reality will catch up with you and will force change upon you.

Xi Jinping and the Chinese Communist party also want to finish a war of  75 years ago and take over Taiwan, which was part  of China in the first half of the 20th Century. He ignores the fact this was now a long time ago and that today the people of Taiwan vote for continued independence. Again history is used and the reality of new circumstances are ignored to justify present policy.

Why can’t they just be honest? Putin and Xi want to take over these places, because they are democratic and therefore a direct threat to their personal wealth, status and power. If people who are culturally very similar to the people over whom they rule start enjoying the benefits of democracy and freedom, then Xi and Putin are highly likely to be pushed aside as new leaders, who will have more focus on the lives of their fellow countrymen,  get  a chance to govern and show what they can do.

This explains why Putin, who is basically a violent criminal gangster and Xi Jinping, who says his ambition is to finish the socialist utopian dream started by Mao, are getting on so well together. They both fear modern western ideology which can no  longer be defeated, or even challenged, intellectually by historic alternatives. Therefore their only option to maintain their personal positions is to use violence against their own people and war against the west.      

Time to choose your future - but please don't ignore the reality of today. Don't let history hold you back.

Fourteen truths that humanity doesn't admit, but needs to face up to.

 1. We all have obligations as well as rights.

Our inalienable rights are well know, but because we live together with others, we cannot do what ever we please. Everything we do has consequences, whether it be how we behave, or what we consume, or what we say and these things effect others and so must be moderated to eliminate harm to others. And when I say others, I mean other humans, other living things, and all future living things. See “is it time for a declaration of human obligations?” below.

2 We usually do what is easiest for ourselves, not what is best for all.

When we vote we nearly always vote for what ever person or party will implement policy that will most benefit us, not others. Likewise, if we see or hear of people causing suffering on others, do we take action or just do nothing, making some excuse that nothing can be done and we are powerless to do anything? Do we not do what is easiest for ourselves, rather than doing what is morally right? Socrates said that with knowledge it would be impossible not to do the right thing, But he was wrong, we can delude ourselves, dismiss knowledge as fake, or pick and choose knowledge to justify what ever we want. In this way events such as the holocaust and holomodor continually occur. See “A History of the world in a single object” below
 
3. The vast majority of us are good natured, but we are all capable of evil or permitting evil to happen.

“There are no evil people, but there are evil acts“ This is the conclusion of prison psychologists who are attempting to understand and thus reduce future violence. If you read history, study the experiments and read of the world today, you will realise it is all about context, not inherent personality. Any ordinary person can cause suffering, or kill, it just requires the situation to give the reason to do it, or permit it to happen, especially when those suffering are not of our own social group and portrayed as others who are of less importance,  or not human at all, and so we fail to see another human who is just like us. See "The battle of Fridaythorpe" below .

4 We are 100% responsible for our own actions.

Human beings can think, and in any situation, can consider options as to how to act next. We can assess different actions and then choose what to do. But we have to think, rather than automatically react, or just do the same as others, and personally decide how we should act. We do have freewill, but we must choose to use it. Therefore we are all responsible for our actions as we are capable of deciding what to do. See “You have freewill, do you choose to use it?” below.

5.Belief in god and an afterlife is comforting but bad for us.

A by-product of our minds, (minds that gave us the adaptability to populate the many varied habitats of this earth), is our need to explain our creation, our purpose and our need to come to terms with the fact that in the future we will die. So to give us comfort we invent stories of all powerful gods and an everlasting life beyond death. However these mythical falsehoods are bad for us, as they absolve us of responsibility or make everyone’s lives on earth less important. Gods or God is in control and we are all going to heaven (or being reincarnated) so what happens when we are alive is not really our responsibility and  all secondary, to what will follow. If we ditched such thinking, and accepted there is no one but us and our lives  are wondrous but short, we might start valuing each other and start really treating each other with love, respect and compassion as most religions teach. See "Concerning religion" and "Atheist faith, hope and prayers" below.

6. We already live in paradise but are slowly destroying it.

We have evolved to live on planet earth, and it will be impossible to travel to another similar planet. The way we currently all want to live, is incompatible and unsustainable with the planet. If we keep doing what we are doing now, the world will just get hotter and hotter and hotter. Some people will survive, but most wont and we will transform this beautiful, rich and varied planet into something impoverished and harsh. Our current competitive tribal nature is not suited to preventing this happening and we must change, and change very fast. See "Impacts of Climate Change" and "Why the majority accept man made climate change, but do nothing about it" below.

7. We are extremely violent creatures.

Our historic past is one of constant violence. Our societies use violence to enforce rules. Violence drives innovation and determines which societies prosper. Our use of violence has made us a successful species - but will it in the future and is there a better way? Nuclear weapons means we now have the means to totally destroy ourselves and because of globalisation the planet is very much smaller. We are all interconnected and inter dependent on each other. Use of violence is no longer an option. See "Violence and how to reduce it" below.

8. We are tribal by nature.

Humans are social animals and evolved in groups. We cannot live on our own. But in our globalised interconnected, interdependent world we can no longer separate ourselves into competing groups and should all start to think that we all share a common humanity, The reality is, that there is the individual who is a member of the global social group. If we can lose our tribalism, we will lose competition between clans, nations, races, religions, genders, organisation. It opens the door of opportunity to a truly tolerant, sharing, supportive, cooperative, compassionate world that will be mutually beneficial for all. See "Now is the time to end tribalism" below.

9  We are still animals whose primary purpose is to eat and reproduce.

Because we are biological organisms, or more fundamentally, self sustaining chemical reactions, the point of our lives is to survive, reproduce, bring up our offspring, then die. Its written into our genes that our bodies and brains are just tools that the gut and genes use to replicate themselves and continue. In the human species the brain created by our genes, gives us a degree of intelligence, that means we have come to dominate all other species .(except a few virus’ that still kill us). However, that intelligence is now backfiring on us, as we compete selfishly to reproduce with the best genes we can. In this big global competition of display, status and power the world is being wrecked, but our genes don’t care. Will our intelligence anticipate the future and over ride our selfish genes? We will soon find out. See also "Human behaviour explained" below.

10 We are not as clever as we think we are.

We used to think we were the at the center of the universe and everything revolved around us. Some people think they are the center of the universe and the everything world should revolve around them. Others say the brain is the most complex structure in the universe but isn’t; the entire planet together with the biosphere in which all the brains survive far more complex. We are always getting things wrong, and we should never be as arrogant as to think we know and stop learning. The more we think we know, the more we realise what little we do know. We should always be open to new learning, new ways of thinking and always aware that we could be wrong and others know more than us. Perhaps it would be the first sign of intelligence, if we owned up to ourselves that we aren’t intelligent at all. See" The Mess the world is in and what to do about it" below.

11 Our Leaders are usually rich, selfish, paranoid, incompetent charlatans, and they think the vast majority of us are too. 

In the past, birth determined who were our leaders. Authoritarian states are lead by the most powerful or most ruthless. Democracy is lead by the most popular or most convincing. But in our increasingly complex world, how can one single person have all the answers? The notion of a single leader in which we delegate all decisions or have to accept as the most able to decide what is for the best, is absurd.  In today’s world we need teamwork, different people for different problems, not the best well meaning fool who thinks he can do a great job and promises the world. See "World leaders - do we need them?" below.

12 Women are more important than men.

Because they have babies, women are far more important than men. Which is why men have and do oppress them and frequently carry out acts of sexual violence against them. In the future when artificial sperm can be made, men will be redundant and the world will be far less violent. See "Women rule the world - they just don't realise it" below.

13 Democracy is not the default setting of societies.

Because of our frequent use of violence, it is usually the most ruthless who are the most powerful and lead a society. Democracy is an alternative that controls the most violent, by clearly demonstrating the will of the society  as to who it wants to lead and when it wants a change of leader. However in order to succeed this system needs some rules that all must obey. and those who break the rules and start to act selfishly in their own interest must be punished. This means vigilance and rule of law, or its back to tyranny. You have to fight for democracy. But democracy must not oppress minorities.  See "the direction of human history" below.

14 Our lives are short but amazing..

Time is the most precious thing we have. Because we all die, from the moment we are born our lives are getting shorter. None of us likes to think that one day we will no longer exist and,when we are young we think we have many years ahead of us, but each moment is unique and will never come again. Each moment we experience is a highly improbable event created from the infinite number of previous highly improbable events but your ability to experience them and memorise them will stop. A lot of people avoid the thought of their priceless lives ending by a made up belief in an after life, but if you don’t delude yourself and face up to your own demise, your life, and more importantly that of all other living things, becomes a priceless joyous miracle of existence.

Acceptance of life coming to a end, is not a tragic thought, it is a liberating joyous thought. Joyous, because it makes life a million times more precious and something not to be wasted. Don’t waste it doing useless or negative things, make the world a better place. See also "The truest thing that everyone knows" below.

 

What's the truest thing that Everyone knows?

 An algorithm asked me - what is the truest thing that everybody knows? Instantly I typed in “You are going to die”.

Now you may think I’ve got problems with my mental health, dwelling on morbid thoughts, but having been a rock climber who climbed with people who died pursuing their passion, and learnt that the ground is very hard, gravity works instantaneously  and I’m very soft, I accepted early in life that my mortality could easily be demonstrated at any  weekend. This acceptance made me a much better rock climber and I appreciated the beautiful and joyful things in life even more. My world was a shining, sparkling beautiful diamond back then, (but on reflection perhaps a crazy selfish one).

Rene Descartes, concluded that the only thing he could be sure of, was the fact that as he could think, he existed. There is also the old cliché that the only thing you can be sure of is “death and taxes“. So combining these you get:-

 “I’m alive, I have to conform to social group norms, and I will die“.

Well, you know about being alive, and I’ve written about social groups previously, so it’s time to write of death!

Back in the mists of time, someone in our prehistoric past, must have had the first human realisation that he or she would also end up dead, like that person who had just “hopped the twig” as my mum's bird metaphor calls dying. This must have been a traumatic, scary and a lonely moment - being the only one to have this new knowledge. It must have been upsetting for this person and those he or she told.

However, to overcome this horrid by- product of our developing intelligence, our ancestors by - passed the negativity and created the myth of the afterlife. There is no need to dwell on the awfulness and sadness of your and others demise, because you can pretend it isn‘t really the end, just a change into something else. What a comfort this must have been, and still is.

The problem is, with our enlightened, inquiring, scientifically trained minds we now know that the psychological trick of heaven is just a fiction. It’s just like Harry Potter, who at the wave of a wand, can solve any problem -  it's just made up, reality isn't like that. And once you know this, the trick no longer works. You can’t go back once you know how the trick's performed.

So, how do we get over the tragic fact that one day there will no longer be a you or I - Not even thoughts or memories - nothing?  Well you don’t get over it, you just have to accept it. It is tragic and sad, but it isn’t really anything to worry about. After all, It can’t be that bad - everyone does it! And as Cervantes says in Don Quixote, once your dead that’s the end of it, no more problems, no more concerns and (I would add) you are leaving the world for those that follow, rather than cluttering up the place using oxygen whilst not contributing. There is a bright side to death, as Monty Python would sing.

And Once you accept the fact that one day your body will run out of energy, and you die, I find it liberating and exhilarating. The fact that you and I are alive to experience the world is made much more amazing. We may only have a few years of existence - but what a phenomenal fact that is.

You and I think, therefore we are.

How wonderful is that? How precious is that?  Celebrate your life and help all others* to celebrate theirs too. 

(*Others I define as every one alive now and in the future, including animals - you help future others by not wrecking the planet)

Happiness

 People want to be happy, but don’t seem to be able to understand what happiness is, let alone know how to achieve it. To tackle this problem, it should be recognised that there is more than one kind of happiness. Perhaps because we only have one word for it, we fail to acknowledge the fact that there is more than one way to achieve the state of being happy. The types of happiness I’ve experienced and witnessed are -

The happiness of innocence

This is the happiness of childhood in which we don’t have a care in the world and can play to our hearts content with friends sheltered from reality. Living is easy and knowledge of the big bad world is absent or lost. Adults can return to this state when they get drunk together, or experience music at a festival, or watch their team win at sport. The troubles of their lives and the world are temporarily forgotten at least until the next day, or for Children when they grow up and learn about reality and life’s problems.

The happiness of parenthood.

The joy of a mother and father at the birth of their children is often described as the happiest moment of their lives. This is something I’ve not experienced first hand, so I will have to take their word for it. Perhaps it’s a deep rooted biological emotion, programmed in to us to ensure the continuation of the species.

The happiness of delusion

An epitaph on a grave stone I came across  read “Always Cheerful”. More like “Completely deluded” I thought to myself.

 I don’t think it is normal to be always happy, as if we were always happy, how would we know we were happy? Happiness must be relative to how we were feeling at an earlier time. As children do we recognise that we are happy or do we later realise how happy we were? If our football team always won, how boring would that be? Aren’t we happier when our team unexpectedly beats a much better side, or we are about to achieve something every one said was impossible?

To experience happiness you have to experience sadness, and humans, at every moment of their lives, are on a  continuum spanning from very sad through to very happy . Being sad all the time is not healthy. Being happy all the time ie deluded, is just madness. Being in the middle is normal and nothing to worry about.

Social Happiness

Being social animals, we crave social acceptance and adulation. All of the above forms of happiness are magnified by sharing with other people, and the more the merrier. Having lots of friends, who act and think like you, means we have status, a support network and hence an easier life. The opposite, ie enemies, people telling you re wrong, and being a loner means you cannot achieve the happiness of innocence, parenthood or achievement. You can achieve the happiness of delusion, but it would be a false happiness, such as the happiness of a religious hermit, who thinks he only needs Gods love to be happy.  
 
The happiness of a worthwhile, recognised achievement

For me, the greatest happiness is experienced when you are about to achieve with your friends, a noble, near impossible, worthwhile goal that earns you status, adulation and respect from your social group.

I say “about” to achieve, because when you accomplish the goal, it always seems to be an anticlimax, and not as satisfying as when you and your friends first realise that you are going to achieve what you didn’t really know was achievable. The moment of success is quickly tainted by the daunting realisation and emptiness of “What next?”.    

This is why I choose to “Make the World a Better Place”. I will never achieve complete success, but small victories along the way, make me very happy.

Israel Palestine - Why not support and care for each other

 The recent attack by Hamas is morally wrong, but the reaction of Israel is also morally wrong. Both sides must be condemned, as the only justification for the State of Israel comes from a story dating back to the Bronze age and Hamas should not kill other human beings in order to further its cause. Neither side makes any serious attempt to integrate or find a final solution, which is to support and care for each other.

The modern state of Israel was formed just after the second world war when us Brits became alarmed at the scale of migration of Jewish people flooding into Palestine, and tried to control the numbers. A short war followed, but the war weary British didn't see the point of fighting and so left. Both the British and Israel didn't considered the Palestinian people already living there. Many in the middle east see Hamas as fighting for their homeland, just like Ukraine, and yet the west backs Israel, thus losing all credibility in the eyes of half the world. It's tribalism at it's worst.

Attacking Gaza with overwhelming force will only breed more hate, more violence and more entrenched view points on both sides. Cutting off water, power and food is morally wrong. It's the same as Stalin did to Ukraine in the holodomor when his communist regime took their food away and 4 million starved. One evil crime does not justify another. The West should be attempting to get both sides to stop basing their policy on history, and should try to get acceptance that neither side is going anywhere, and make all sides focus on how to make a better future,  respectfully living together, whether that be in some form of a two state solution or sharing the land.  

The past cannot be changed, but we shouldn't let the past restrict our options for a better future. Israel should seek justice not revenge, and never forget they have a responsibility to the Palestinian people whose home they now occupy and should share.

As I have said before, -

All war is tragedy. War is a primitive, backward and a base activity that is promoted by people who are not thinking of a better future and follow out of date philosophies. Those who start wars are people who do not have the skills  to solve their problems by normal political means, ie respectful negotiation and compromise. They can only achieve their goals by conning others to commit violence with threats and lies and so are not fit to lead. War only spreads destruction, desolation, misery and pain. It is no solution to problems. Everyone has a selfless duty, not to hide from the horrors of our past, but to stand together against such cowards and fools. We should all unite to consign war to the history books, to keep war out of our present and humanity’s future.

I have a dream!

 Our closest relatives, the Neanderthals, died out 40,000 years ago leaving us, Homo sapiens, to dominate the planet.  In his book on the subject, palaeoanthropologist Ludovic Slimak proposes that their demise was not because of failure to adapt to climate change, but because of homo sapiens superior weapons. What is implied, is that Homo sapiens killed off the Neanderthals, in the first incidence of genocide. 

In the Neolithic, when a settled farming lifestyle was becoming established, evidence is emerging (in  Europe) for many acts of whole communities being massacred with bodies being disposed of in mass  graves. (Schoneck - Kilianstadtan). Central Europe is being seen as a bit of a "blood bath" as Professor Alice Roberts puts it. Also when homo sapiens first entered the Americas and New Zealand,  species went extinct, so it is speculated that we killed them off in a frenzy of hunting.

Of course, these are only  theories based on very little evidence, so you can pick and choose your preferred version of reality, and no one can say you are wrong. But given humanity’s historic record of violence, tribalism and destruction, it certainly fits my low opinion of homo sapiens. (See “History of the world in a single object” below).

It is now generally accepted that we are in a new geological era, the Anthropocene*. This period started mid 20th Century, when humans started to irreversible change the planet and now there is no going back. We continue to harm ourselves and the planet through wars, pollution, tribalism, violence and selfishness and by using technology to vastly speed up and increase the effects of these bad habits, it appears that the future of Homo Sapiens is going to be worse, and probably much worse.

If you accept that, because of our superior weaponry, we raped and killed off the Neanderthals, (rape could explain the Neanderthal genes in our genome),  fought battles with the first farmers and killed off many species upon arrival in a new land, then it looks likely that from the very beginning, our success as a species is based on  genocide against other peoples, namely the Neanderthals,  It would appear that our fundamental nature  from deep prehistory, is shameful. People like Hitler, Stalin and Putin are just keeping up the tradition.

I’m sure you are aware of the many great challenges facing humanity, and if you have read some of my essays, you will know that I’m not convinced humanity is up to the job. Great change is coming and we need to change greatly. We need to learn from the past, face up to who we are, accept that our fundamental nature, which up till now, has turned humanity into a great success**.and move on to something better. You could say that because we need to change fundamentally, humanity needs to evolve.

So, having acknowledged the reality of a new geological era, why can‘t we recognise the emergence of a new species, a new split in the tree of life,, a new version of Homo. Isn’t it time for the emergence of  HOMO MUTUALARLIS, a new species that cares, co-operates, puts others first and rejects the violence, selfishness and tribalism of our less enlightened ancestors? Such a species, that recognises that their individual wants, desires and life, is of equal. or of less, importance than that of  others,  that   continually strives to make the world a better place, rather than worse, could then look forward to a compassionate, happier, and sustainable world. 

Well, that’s my dream, you probably think. But aren't there already examples of this fine new species out there in the field? We just need them to breed like rabbits!!!!!

*(up date - geologists who are more at home with timescales of millions of years have rejected this conceit, because the few thousand years of humanity will leave no significant trace in geologic record. But the idea has taken root in the public imagination)

**(if you regard accumulation of knowledge and domination of other species as a definition of success)

Violence and how to reduce it.

 The news and history books are full of violence. War in Ukraine, fighting in the Middle East, gun murders, stabbings and sexual violence are portrayed as the norm and it seems it has always been this way. Why are humans so violent towards each other, and if we understood why, could the knowledge be used to eliminate it? Certain writers (Pinker) have pointed out that in recent times the number of wars have been on the downturn, but the risk of this trend reversing and the unacceptable high levels of gun, knife and sexual crime mean human behaviour is not improving significantly. There is still much work to be done,  in order to make the world a better place.

To tackle this subject, it is necessary to recognise the various different forms of violence, whether it be at individual, societal or international level,  and then decide if there are non violent alternatives.

A) Violence as protection.

If some one threatens you or attacks your close friends and love ones, they will definitely be doing so because they think you are no threat to them. No one starts a fight thinking they will be the one who ends up being worse off. However, for you, the target of these threats and violence, there are three well know options open to you. 1) take  a beating (turn the other cheek) and hope it stops quickly, and seek justice later 2) Run away (flight response) or 3) use violence to stop violence ie fight back. Options 1) and 2) are non violent on your part, but are risky; as they leave the aggressor in a position to commit further violent acts. The aggressor may later reflect on their behaviour and realise they acted selfishly and apologise, but usually more violence will follow. Option 3, fighting back, will lead to less violence if you can beat the aggressor, but if you lose, you will have taken a beating for nothing and the aggressors violent tactics will be rewarded. And even if you do win, it will always be at a cost to yourself and the defeated are unlikely to revert to peaceful ways and will probably seek revenge much later.

Are there other non violent options? Of course there are. Firstly you could project an image of superior strength, so no aggressor ever thinks he can win, so peace ensues - but this is still peace by threat of violence so doesn’t really lead to a relaxed peaceful society.  The cold war is an example.

No, I would say the best non violent response to aggression is to get all your friends to stand with you and face down the aggressor. If someone picks on you, call on others to stand shoulder to shoulder and send the message that the aggressor will have to defeat many, if he wants to defeat you. This is the strategy used by kids getting the assistance of their big brother and also used by Nato concerning Ukraine. Standing with Ukraine gives them a chance against Putin, but if Nato truly backed Ukraine and committed all of Natos forces, then Putin would back down. This explains why he keeps use of  nuclear retaliation in the minds of everyone, as so far this keeps Nato out of the war.. 

B) Violence as Punishment

Humans live in societies, and to live successfully together, societies create rules and laws so individuals don’t make the society worse by acting in their own self interest at the detriment of others. And with rules, comes enforcement and punishment,  so that future bad behaviour is deterred. Historically, this punishment was  some form of violence, whether it was a parent hitting a child, getting paraded around the village as a shameful offender, being banished, mutilated or executed. Societies around the world used violence as an acceptable method of punishment for the good of the whole. Today punishment is less violent, as children are taught how to behave by reward, verbal  punishment and temporary banishment of smart phones or friends; and adults are fined or locked up in prison, but violence is still there in the background, as the ultimate threat.

Could humans live in a world with only non violent punishments? To a certain extent this has already happened but if a prisoner is violent to the guards, force will be met with reasonable force, which is deemed acceptable by the law. But in this situation both the prisoner and the guards are worse off, so violence is futile but happens anyway.

Perhaps if rules could be explained and understood as being fair and for the good of all, and that violence makes everyone worst off, perhaps then societies could ditch violence once and for all. But I suppose there will always be rules, laws and therefore law breakers and the need for punishment. The aim should be to keep these to low levels through a culture in which violence is not seen as acceptable or beneficial to anyone, and  an absolute last resort.

C) Violence as an outlet to frustration

When some one of higher status, such as your boss, does something you don’t like, you may feel powerless to do any thing about it. You will be frustrated and it is all too common to take out anger on someone of lower power who cannot strike back. Domestic violence is an inexcusable example. However,  recognising your  frustration, the unfairness of taking it out on innocent others  and not accepting you are totally powerless in any situation, results in non violent solutions. Bush and Blair invading Iraq after 9/11 is an international example of a violent response to frustration. They went to war with a non nuclear nation, when the organisation and people behind 9/11 were criminals, not a country. 

I suspect the mass shootings common in the USA are this form of violence. People of low status, empowered by easily available weapons, who think they have no options to improve their lives, take it out on innocent unarmed bystanders.

D) Violence as a means to increase social or national status (power)

Recent research (Harvard Study of Adult Development) into happiness has concluded that the happiest people have lots of friends,  which they call high Social Fitness. For example happy people are popular and have a high social status and therefore social power and also social support. As my previous essays describe, the reasons relate to life’s basic need to reproduce with some one else’s good genes in order to ensure successful offspring in future generations. If you are popular and have many friends, the choice of partners will be so much greater and better.

Most of us choose to work hard, be nice, helpful, entertaining and generous in order to get friends and increase our social status. However this takes time, effort, self sacrifice and personality that some people of low status do not possess, or just can’t  be bothered with. Instead they may choose to get violent as a short cut to leap up the social ladder.

Want to get rich quick - just threaten and steal and then share your ill gotten gains with your rapidly increasing circle of friends. The police will be after you but if you can get away with it, you can live like Royalty. it’s a short cut to increase social status and once you have established your self; your increased power means you can start ordering others about to do the dirty work. As long as the money keeps coming in and you keep being generous, your position will be maintained or enhanced. Of course you have to ignore the pain and suffering inflicted on victims, but why care about them when you are doing so well?

Putin’s war in Ukraine is fundamentally about maintaining or increasing his social status. Before the war he was losing popularity, but annexing Crimea was one of his popular successes - so why not annex all of Ukraine and boost his popularity even more. Unfortunately this has not proved successful and as he is now fighting a long war that he cant back out of or win, all he can do is put as best a spin on it as possible and show how popular he is with North Korea, China, India and some African States, who’s leaders also have popularity problems of their own. If citizens realised that wars only benefit the elites, who keep well away from the danger, whilst wasting  national wealth and people, perhaps they would stop following orders and only fight in matters concerning self protection.

Violence is also manifesting itself at an international level in an attempt to increase the respect and standing of one nation over another. China, that for past historical reasons wrongly has an ingrained inferiority complex, is toying with the idea of using war and aggression to gain the respect of the West and teach the world a lesson that their way of doing things is as good as, or superior to theirs. It’s a shame that they don’t understand, that what would really gain the respect and admiration of the west, is if they could develop a country, that has excellent health and education systems, a thriving sustainable green economy, fair, tolerant and respected law and order, free citizens and superior wise leadership. But instead, it is far easier to bomb and invade Taiwan or so many in China think. 

Wars fought over resources, such as Israel / Palestine wars over who has rights to occupy the land, fall into this category. After the second world war, Israelis kicked the British out of Palestine, when the Colonial Power became alarmed at the high number of Jewish people migrating into the area. War weary Britain didn't put up much of a fight and no one considered the views of the powerless Palestinian who already lived there. The violence has never stopped since, as one side sees a Bronze age story as evidence of their right to the land, and the other side says we are here now and always have been. Neither side forgets the history, nobody is talking and neither side works for a better integrated, respectful tolerant future.

To counter violence at an individual level, the culture of society especially for our young people must be one that abhors any form of violence against others. If a clear message is sent that using a knife or gun will cause suffering to others,  turn you into a target of violence, will not increase your social status and there are plenty of other non violent opportunities to progress in life, we will see less gun crime, knife crime and sexual crime etc. But this will require a complete change of mindset, from reducing violence in films, games, sport and music as well as education, celebrity endorsement, as well as youth development programmes  to bring about a change in culture.  

E) Violence as an alternative to tolerance and debate (failure of politics)

Everything you think, you believe to be true, because  you wouldn’t think it if you knew it to be false. Therefore it is easy to conclude that anyone who thinks differently to you is wrong, but because you can’t prove otherwise or can't back your ideas with indisputable evidence (or don't want to risk finding out you are wrong), you just punch them in the face to shut them up.

Other people of differing ideologies, faiths or beliefs, who to you are obviously wrong and therefore inferior, can be dismissed as stupid and sub human. You in your correct mindset are superior. Such warped thinking, taken to extremes, leads to violent oppression of minorities, wars of religion, holocausts and genocides. Beware when anyone who starts talking about others in a dehumanising, prejudiced, ignorant or biased way, it could be used as an excuse for violence against them at a later date.

If we could just accept that some questions have no right or wrong answer, and others think differently to you or I, we are all continually learning and violent intolerance just leads to more violence, perhaps humanity may be judged as making progress.

F) Psychopathic or Evil violence

Psychologists working with mass murderers, sex offenders and very violent people report that there is no such thing as an evil person. There are evil acts and if we are truthfully with ourselves, we are all capable of such acts. It all depends on context. I would shoot Putin if I had a chance and would justify this to myself as destroying a cancerous cell for the health of the body of humanity - but such an act would probably just start an international war or send Russia into chaos, so wouldn’t I be as evil as I see him? (Perhaps it should be the Russian people who deal with Putin.)

Forensic Psychologists, such as Rabecca Myer and Gwen Adshead, who endeavour to treat offenders to prevent more victims, have written books based on their experiences with violent serial killers and sex offenders, (of which I have only read reviews). However what I understand they write of is many normal people who have done terrible things. This form of violence is thankfully rare, but Myers and Adshead says that risk factors for  violence are, no where to live, substance abuse, child hood abuse, paranoid mental illness, no sense of purpose, depression, disorganised lives, fear, disillusionment, no self worth and no relationships, so perhaps its all about attempting to increasing social status, but by the wrong method. Fundamentally, they point out there is no gene for violence, therefore such behaviour could be drastically reduced given sufficient resources. But its quicker and easier to just lock them up rather than address the causes of the problems..  

G) Sexual Violence. 

To realise the enormity of the problem of sexual violence, principally rape, I would encourage everyone to read  Disgrace, Global Reflections on Sexual Violence by historian Joanna Bourke. This book gives an unbiased, non political and scholarly overview of the problem, and recent attempts to reduce it. The last chapter calls for a rape free world but (as all historian do) fails to develop the knowledge gained into a practical strategy for future action beyond calling for solidarity. Having just read the book, the following are my preliminary suggestions on how to reduce sexual violence, which at a fundamental level is the failure of one individual, to recognize  that the wants, desires and life of another individual, is of equal importance to their own.

a) Rape, whilst it does not end a life, destroys a life. Therefore legal systems should treat rape the same as murder. 

b) Boys and girls should grow up and be educated together, never separately. If they learn to live together as soon as they are born, the more chance of respect of the other sex, will be a life long trait. 

c) Male masturbation must be de-stigmatized and become culturally acceptable. Consensual Homosexuality gives males access to (and if measures are taken against sexual disease)  unlimited harmless sex. For heterosexual males, it is a cultural norm (I would say myth) that sex can only take place with a woman. However if masturbation is seen as an acceptable and equally pleasant alternative, this gives an outlet to the male sex drive and the basic genetic programme of the urgent need to reproduce. Such a culture change would eliminate the need for comfort women, prostitution and perhaps rape.

d) War, which reduces social behavioral constraints and hence lead to more sexual violence, must be consigned to the history books. 

e) Religions, with their in built assumption of male domination over women, must be tackled with humanism and atheism.

H) Delegated Violence or State approved violence

Here in the UK, the law says that use of "reasonable force" is acceptable to counteract violence.  However in other societies the definition of what is reasonable will be different. If those in power, give orders to those lower in the hierarchy, ie go arrest that trouble maker, or go fight that war, then they are not being violent themselves and those who obey the orders can think that they are not responsible for the violence, as they have the excuse that they are only following orders. History and the Miligram experiments the 1960's show how important the context of a situation is to the level of violence a person will carry out. 

Obeying authority is drummed into us from the first moment we are born. We are taught for good reason to obey our parents, as children know nothing of the dangers of the world. This trait stays with us into adulthood as society works best if everyone obeys the rules that make life easier for everyone. However because of this and the basic drive to be successful in our society, individuals rarely stand up to power when rules or those in power are bad and promote violence. And because those in power gain by delegating the violence, and reward those carrying out the violence, it is very difficult to change the culture.

To prevent this kind of violence, someone has to stand up and say this is wrong, followed by many joining until the majority overthrow those in power. I can highly recommend Bystander Society by Mary Fulbrook concerning what can result when people take the easiest personal path, and just look the other way, even when they know what is happening around them is wrong.

Conclusion
 

Human societies and international relations are based on violence and it appears that we cannot live with out at least the threat (and occasional use) of violence to enforce acceptable behaviour.

Could this change in the future? Is the abandonment of violence just a dream?

Well, the Banded Mongoose Research Project (please bear with me) studies how the social banded mongoose lives in groups that frequently fight battles with neighbouring groups in order to gain territory. They attempt to drive other groups to extinction by killing young female pups. “Humans and Banded Mongooses are among the most warlike animals on the planet” says Michael Cant the Project leader. This is all very interesting and makes for an entertaining read. However, what the article I read mentioned, but didn’t highlight, is that the Banded Mongoose is one of 25 species of mongoose in Africa and that most species of mongoose are solitary whereas the Banded Mongoose lives in colonies called bands. Therefore most other species survive by more peaceful means. Perhaps if the researchers studied those more peaceful species, rather than the war like species, we might realise that violence as a strategy has alternatives that can be equally, if not more successful. As Peter Kropotkin highlighted back in 1902, peaceful co operation, sharing and  mutual aid is very much a part of nature and a much more productive strategy, especially in a tough environment.

Other research in to violence in apes is highlighting the importance of females moderating male violence (kit Opie of University of Bristol). Primates, who live in groups where only females leave the group, where males form coalitions, males are dominant over females and males are exclusively responsible for defending the group, all trend towards increased levels of violence. So perhaps increased sex equality in human societies could lead to decreasing levels of violence.

An educational strategy is needed, and this is to get any potential aggressor to reflect on the long term implications of violent behaviour. If everyone considers what their future life will be like if they adopt a strategy of  violent behaviour, and by using examples from history  and personal experience to make them realise that violence only leads to more violence, which is to theirs and everyone's detriment,  perhaps we will see less.

So, I conclude that humans don‘t need to base their societies on violence. Violence is a learnt behaviour that can be unlearnt. It happens because some one or some group thinks they can benefit from its use, which in the long run is unlikely to be true.  There is an alternative way to live and (despite what is reported in the news and we encounter on the internet)  most of us have chosen that path of peace, it just needs the majority to convince the minority that it is so. Perhaps if Russia had a First Lady and the Chinese Government was 50/50 male female rather than 100% male and everyone shunned anyone gaining from using any form of violence, we might see a better world. 

If we recognised we are one global tribe of humanity, all living on the same planet, perhaps we would realise there is no "other" to fight, and through out history, we have only been harming our selves.


    

Less is More

 I’ve called my blog ‘Make the world a better place’ as I think all our actions should be for the benefit of all  others, living now or in the future. This gives human lives purpose, meaning, value and happiness. But if this is true, the exact opposite must also be true, so I’ve also toyed with the idea of renaming it ‘Stop ruining the world’ because, as the world is already wonderful, is there is any need to “make” anything? Maybe we only need to minimise our harmful actions in order to keep the world the paradise it is. Perhaps we should learn to do less, not more, especially concerning the environment.

I first learnt the value of inaction and the difficulty I have in doing nothing, on a walk, or rather a paddle, in New Zealand. The Inland Pack Track involves paddling down a spectacular river gorge in ankle deep warm tropical water that cuts through the limestone landscape. It takes a few days, so nights are spent sleeping in caves in the cliff sides, one of which is so large it’s called the ballroom. It’s all very idyllic, and after the first day of relaxing paddling (there’s no tiring up hill sections)  I set up camp under the huge overhang of the ballroom. After cooling  off under the waterfall, I went to sleep next to a camp fire whilst watching the glow worms on the roof of the cave. I was perfectly contented despite the rain that had start to fall.

However, the next morning it was still raining. The water level had risen alarmingly and the river was now a raging torrent. Above the noise of the waves, eddies and backflows, the sound of the boulders grinding together as they were tumbled down stream by the power of the water, meant carefree paddling was off the agenda. The water was at least a meter deep and fast flowing. No way was I getting into the water carrying a big rucksack. I was trapped.

By mid day the rain had stopped but the water flow remained high and fast. As something to do I had built a small cairn to mark the water level, laid out stones to spell SOS to any passing aircraft and thought of bad outcomes. I was on my own, know one knew where I was, and the car was parked off road so no one would notice it. It had stopped raining, but what if it started again? What if it was the start of the rainy season and the river would remain high until next summer. My map, warning of the dangers of rivers and the frequency of drowning, only made me feel more worried and isolated. No one would miss me or noticed my abandoned car, so hope of  outside help  was weeks away. I rationed out my three packs of noodles and concluded I had to do something.

Being a climber and mountaineer, I decided to tackle the gorge walls. If escape by the river was impossible, I would have to get out over land. However, as the cliffs where covered in thick tropical vegetation, and the eroded limestone landscape full of man trapping pot holes, this proved dangerous and impossible with a heavy back pack. There was no exposed rock to get hold of and everything was covered in deep soggy vegetation, most of which was extremely slippery, unstable and so rotten it  disintegrated when touched. What looked like solid wood, often proved to be rotten and just collapsed when touched and disappeared into some hole that was hidden by a covering of thick vegetation. After an hour of effort getting no where and several near falls into the river and slips into a hidden pot holes, I retreated back to the cave.

Dejected, I noticed the level of the river had dropped a few inches but was still flowing as strong as ever. I paced about. I couldn’t read. I was full of stress and energy but there was nothing to do but just sit and look at the water and listen to the grinding of the submerged boulders. I though of home.

That evening I cracked. I couldn’t just sit here doing nothing. I had to do something . The water had dropped a few more inches but at that rate it would be many days before it returned to paddling depth. I found two stout wooden sticks to aid my balance, donned my back pack and entered the water.

The power of the water against my legs  was surprising. I struggled to keep my footing.  When it reached my waist, both sticks snapped under the strain, and I was swept off into deeper water. This was a very dangerous moment If I lost my footing, my sack would have flipped me over and probably held me under. I would have either to jettison the pack (which would have been difficult whilst being swept downstream) or drown.

Fortunately neither of these things happened. When the sticks broke. I leaned back against the flow but was picked up by the water and swept down stream. My pack, however, which was full of plastic bags to keep things dry, acted as a float, and as I was not totally out of my depth, my occasional contact with the river bed meant I was able to prevent my self from rolling over. I sort of moon walked, barely in control, in giant hops or bounces rapidly downstream fighting to keep upright. There was no time to think, just survive. Go with the flow but fight to keep upright.

I have no idea of the distance I went or the time I was in the water, but eventually I was swept to the other side of the gorge and managed to grab hold of rocks on the far cliff and bring myself to a halt. Clinging to boulders and the cliff I managed to work my way further down stream until I could scramble up to a small cave well above the water level. Probably shocked by the experience, I don’t remember what I though at that moment other than to spending  the night in that cave was the only option.

The next morning, the sun was out, the water was back to ankle depth and I realised I had risked a drowning for nothing. In this limestone country the water levels go down as quickly as they come up and you should wait patiently rather than enter the fast flowing deep water. Doing nothing is the best option.

Ever since this experience I’ve been aware that western culture or the “Protestant Work Ethic” as its called means I and a lot of other white Anglo Saxons just can’t stop doing things, regardless of whether its for the better or not. This obsession to seize the day, get stuck in or find a solution is deep rooted and often creates more problems than it solves, especially when we don‘t fully understand reality.  From Robinson Crusoe who tirelessly constructs his new home on a desert island, to the film the Martian, where Matt Demon  Sciences the S**t out of being stuck on Mars, work followed by more work is always deemed to be the answer.

Years ago, I enrolled on a management  course, but when I inquired if any research had been done into the concept of over-management, (ie when too many cooks spoil the broth), I didn’t get a helpful response. When I was working, it was frowned upon if I knocked off early, turned off my phone or didn’t work weekends, even though every thing was under control. Even now, when I’m retired, when I say I’ve not been doing much and have no current plans, I get sorrowful looks as I’m deemed to be unhappy and wasting my life, of which little remains.

Governments find it almost impossible to do nothing and can’t help but interfere. They get criticised for not sorting out what ever is deem to be the latest crisis. In-action is dithering, a sign of indecisiveness, lack of confidence and  weakness, So a considered thoughtful response is out of the question, and a knee jerk, over reacting panic measure is  the norm. Keeping the hysterical fear spreading press (who must have an inflated story in order to boost sales) and ranting scared majority happy is the priority. Hence we get lockdowns, windfall taxes, company bail outs, hand outs, bad laws and economic policies and pointless targets rather than well thought out policy that addresses the real causes of the perceived problems which will probably sort themselves out given time.

Particularly, when it comes to the environment, doing nothing is especially important. I used to volunteer to work for a local conservation group, but all we seem to do was “manage” nature by cutting down trees, digging up shrubs and piling up the debris into large heaps that remained an eyesore for years to come. Fortunately when I wrote to them, explaining that the most beautiful places in the world I had visited, where the ones were humans had little or no impact, my idea that conservation should be about minimising the human impact on the land seem to take root, and they are now busying themselves buying up land, remodelling it to whatever they deem best and declaring themselves the saviours of nature. We just can’t get our heads round the fact that nature doesn’t need us and would be far better off with out us.  

With the implications of man made climate change now obvious, it is important that we learn to do nothing or a whole lot less, especially when it comes to burning fossil fuels. Unfortunately there is currently no sustainable way of fly off to all parts of the world, as I ignorantly did when younger. We will have to learn that we can still enjoy life without air miles. There is beauty and wonder wherever you look in this world and books and the computer can bring far off places to you with out the emissions. I acknowledge its not the same as visiting a honey pot tourist location for yourself, but every man destroys what he loves, and isn’t mass tourism destroying exactly what we are hoping to find when we travel? On my last visit to a Mediterranean Island, it was over run by cruise ship passengers, souvenir shops, massive soulless holiday developments, commercialised crowded beaches and noisy night time bars staffed and owned by non locals. Hell truly  is other people, if you want to experience the beauty of the world, and don‘t we just go to these place just to brag about them, rather than truly experience them?.

Its easy to forget that adventures and fun can be had closer to home and there’s isn’t a need to go far to fill our free time. Hopefully more will realise that the holiday industry is just selling us empty dreams and will, like me, learn that doing nothing is sometimes the best option, without nearly drowning on the other side of the world.       
 

Human behaviour Explained

The writer of a letter published in the New Scientist magazine declares that fathoming human behaviour is hard. However, if we condense the point of a humans life to be, firstly survive by the easiest means, then climb the social status ladder as high as possible so we can  reproduce with the best genes possible,  followed by bring up the kids and grand kids, and finally run out of energy and die - then perhaps things become clearer. 

From this premise it is easy to see that we crave approval and status within our social groups, (as this makes survival and reproduction alot easier) so we will usually follow group behaviour, even when it is not the morally right or intelligent thing to do. Our infrequent but continued use of war and violence is explained as a short cut for low status individuals to gain wealth & status thus becoming more attractive to the opposite sex.. Our reluctance to reduce CO2 emissions, even though we know they are damaging our planet, can be explained as to do so, means changing our high consuming, high status, oil based life styles, that demonstrates what  great genes we have and how successful offspring will be, if they are mixed with yours.

 Evidence – I’ve just told my partner I will never fly again and was threatened with the end of our 14 year relationship!!! I suppose it all boils down to sex in the end. 

Or will intelligence finally over ride our selfish genes? 

Update Aug 24 - my partner and I are still together and enjoying our new electric car, train journeys and sex!!.