Nuclear threats have returned to global discourse, with Russia and Pakistan hinting at their arsenals in response to regional tensions. As old rivalries resurface, recent research reveals that revenge, not competition, is often the primary motive behind violence—offering insight into the cycles seen in South Asia and Europe.
Historically, thinkers like Rousseau and Hobbes framed violence as a battle between innate peace and brutal survival. However, data-driven studies, such as Steven Pinker’s The Better Angels of Our Nature, challenge these views. Pinker and later researchers Phil Thomson and John Halstead highlight that humanity’s hunter-gatherer past—96% of our existence—was less violent than farming societies. Early agriculture introduced fixed assets, sparking disputes. Yet, mature agrarian communities proved less violent than their primitive counterparts.
Their most surprising finding: revenge is the top driver of violence, not material gain. This may explain long-standing geopolitical grudges, like India-Pakistan hostilities. False historical grievances are often used by political demagogues to justify violence and consolidate power.
Slavoj Žižek identifies two forms of violence: subjective (visible and blamed on individuals) and objective (rooted in societal structures like inequality and discrimination). Much of modern violence operates invisibly, masked by systemic forces and normalized injustice.
Although fewer people now die from violence, public fear remains elevated—fueling politics and global tension. As the tools of destruction grow more powerful, understanding the roots of violence becomes critical. In Žižek’s words and Lenin’s advice: now more than ever, we must “learn, learn, and learn.”
Read also: