I scooped this from someone’s Tumblr post, and lost the link. Credit is due. But anyway, I thought that that remarkable downturn in civilian and military deaths was interesting. Technology and medical advances are responsible. More and more victims survive and survive with wounds, damage and handicaps where previously they would have died. No doubt surgical precision in strikes prevent less collateral damage. I don’t deny that mistakes are made.
Advances in information, science, technology mechanics and medicine bring that about.
And though the graph doesn’t cover it, even as populations grow larger, deaths from wars seem to have decreased. But more likely they are spread out over a larger area and contained as smaller, localized wars and will limit the larger massive death counts. Looking at larger conflagrations though, the war of the roses, the first and second world wars stand out.
And look at 1950. I can recall being alarmed, as a child, to know the world’s population would be 3 billion. Even as there are more and more people in the world, from about 1950, there has been no large war, but, yes, a series of small ones all over everywhere.
And wars are about resources. With that in mind, and that steep downturn, prompted me to Google up a graph of the infamous CO2 hockey stick graph.
The vertical scales are in no way related, but…even if you squash it up and down, something curious happens after the Second World War. Military and civilian deaths drop. CO2 emissions shoot, well, skyward.
I’m no statistician. I was interested only in the visual curiousity. But I believe there is some content in this. Filed under What Does It All Mean?