can there be liberty without war

[Hyperqube]

I was having an on-line discussion about Dr Doom and it made me wonder.

 

For those that don't know, Dr Doom is a 'bad guy' in the Marvel universe - a powerhungry megalomaniac dictator. The thing though, that not many people know though, is that he's right (well at least in the Marvel universe): there's a great magical being that has seen all possible futures, and notes that the only future with peace and prosperity (or something like that) is the one where Doom rules. While Doom is considered a villan, in an ironic twist, he's actually the only one fighting for world peace.

 

 

This made me ponder, if Marvel had a point. In a nutshell: Liberty does implies freedom to disagree. But disagreement leads to conflict and conflict leads to war (especially on a global scale).

 

 

Is exremism (political/religious/...) a by-product of freedom?

And what if Doom existed in this world? Supposing you'd know with absolute certainty that the path of a warmongering dictator was the path that eventually leads to peace & prosperity - would you set moral and political principles aside?

 

thoughts? oppinions?

 

[AFFIRMATIVE]

"He used his genius and technology to transform Latveria into a paradise where no citizen wants, no one is threatened by war, and all praise Doom-- or face the consequences"

 

So in the marvel universe, the magical being implies that world peace can only be achieved by a dictator.

 

North Korea however lives by a totalitarian dictatorship, meaning absolute zero freedom from the citizens. So you can't be too extreme because look how they live, a little buble of ignorance surrounded by poverty and corruption.

 

It's very subjective on how people view world peace, some view it to be completely under control by a single government without any oppositions, others view it as complete freedom among others without any government, but then as you said people will have the freedom to disagree and it will eventually lead to conflict. Even if there would be a single religion in the world, people would just divide and create a new version of that religion to suit their own morals.  To answer the topics question, the fact that the concept of world peace is subjective in itself proves that there won't be any   .

 

So by process of elimination, you would need to remove the freedom of disagreement, but then would it even be any freedom if a person like Doom would rule the world? In conclusion the only way to live in peace and prosperity is forcing people to not be divided, then i'm not sure if there would even be any freedom, and i don't think many people would set their principals aside for that.

 

It reminds of that scene in Deus ex where JC talks with Morpheus (an AI), where the basic principle is that people would be all under the rule of an AI.

 

 

 

[cąℓσceđrus ☁☽]

there can be no peace until the enemies of liberty are destroyed, or all those who value liberty are destroyed