What about a democracy/representative democracy lowers the likelihood of fighting wars?
To me this comment seems like you believe that it's not so much that individual citizens want a war, but that the Big Bad King/Dictator/Grand Poobah(s) are more so. And that...ain't the case. Who fought more wars during its classical existence, Athens or Sparta? (Hint: it's not the one where the ruling entrenched socially backwards eugenically based military oligarchical dictatorship would be toppled if war went badly!) Hell, in many cases, the fact that the participatory nations were democratic/representative democratic actually made the wars longer and more devastating. Look at the Peloponnesian War, where the Athenian demos refused to give up its power and prestige despite major setbacks until the bitter end; look at the First and Second Punic Wars, when the Roman and Carthaginian Republics spent decades tearing each other to shreds, the first in a bloody stalemate and the second when first one, then the other was brought to the brink of destruction - both situations that would have had the pragmatic Hellenistic monarchs of Arche Seleukeia, Makedonia, and Aigyptos running for ink and paper for a peace treaty - and more recent times, when the French Revolutionary governments not only refused to simply die but caused the greatest destruction and political turmoil since the Thirty Years' War in attempting to spread liberty, equality, and fraternity to the rest of the world. When you can get the People behind something, they just don't stop until the fat lady sings.
Dachspmgthe the Athenian failure of a democracy (even if it was not a total failure and our famous Pericles did play a part in it) due to some reasons has nothing to do with today.
Can you please provide me examples of this century (the 20th one , that is) , in regard to the modern world's conditions so i can take what you say seriously ?
I simply can not take any of what you have said seriosuly.
Today , Democratic regimes has the tendecy to alienate people from war. Precisely because they have deemed it more damaging than peace. WW2 also played a big reason to that.
To change that there must happen some social changes in such countries
which would move the people beliefs from being pro-peace into Pro-War. Such changes is much Fear-mongering but truth be told i consider such practices to be against the spirit of democracy and that democracies can develop into having instictive reflexive reactions against such moves that would make it less effective.
Whatever the case is , Fear mongering may succeed at giving popular support to the war , but the cost of the war is certainly going to offset such effect and Popular support of it will decline.
Remember i am talking about modern democracies. Not Athens vs Sparta where there where a thousand and one other social differences in the world one should have thought of.
For example Whatever the goverment type of Athens was , they where naturally expansionists while the Spartans wanted Isolation and no Foreigners at all influencing their state and influencing their system. Athens democracy vs The one in a kind Spartan governmental type may had led the Athenians into being more expansionists but really that is a completly usselles analogy with today's situation.
You could make one analogy with North Korea and the USA for example but not all fascist Regimes end up being Like North Korea. Which interestingly enough has the Chinese in the north and the South Koreans/Americans in the south making it unable to expand. Then again the disadvantages of such isolanist policies by North Korea greatly offset the disadvantages Wars by democratic states.
And there is no reason to believe fascist states will not expand until they can't no more and then isolate them selfs or use racist laws if they have space to do so.
I am looking at you National socialist Germany ...
Anyway you can do better.
