Humanity cannot live without war

I am writing a story from the point of view of villain, a immortal monster with the power to travel between worlds, and in every world he tries to conquer, he realizes that without a monster like him to fight, humans will murder each other to extinction.

And this is the question the villain ask himself for most of the story. Given where humanity is in it's evolution, can we live without going to war? Or war is the only fate awaiting for us?

What do you think?

Since you're the writer, it's up to you to decide what the end philosophical decision is. In my opinion, yes, humanity can live without war, just not without conflict, much in the same way a single human can't live a life without minor conflicts of interest.

edited 20th Dec '12 6:55:53 PM by MrAHR

What he said. Take a look at The Left Hand of Darkness for a world on which war is virtually unknown but that still has plenty of conflict.

edited 20th Dec '12 8:47:34 PM by Robbery

At the very least I don't think it's inevitable that we'll murder each other to extinction. Thanks to evolution most warfaring animals keep a pretty good murdering balance so that conflict is maintained without threatening the survival of the species - if extinction becomes a real danger we should instinctively band together to maintain a sustainable unit until there's once again sufficient population to support multiple competing groups.

and then we can murder one another again with impunity...

You can do whatever you want in your own story set in a universe of your own creation, but for your character to assume that and be right, you would likely need to modify your setting to be unlike reality in order to justify it, like provide a specific reason as to why humans are compelled to kill each other.

From a realistic standpoint, yes, humans can live without war, the question is if we will choose to. Humans will probably never eradicate war by themselves, although I think saying that our eventuality is to kill each other to extinction is an exaggeration.

Well, does the villain believe that War Is Hell or does he believe that War Is Glorious? You need to define what his thought processes and beliefs before you can extrapolate his opinions.

If he believes the former (which others have pointed out is closer to reality), then he needs to ask himself why people do it anyway. There are many answers to that question.

If he believes the latter, then he needs to ask why people do anything else, and there are just as many answers to that question.

Either process is viable, and Humans Are Bastards and Rousseau Was Right aren't mutually exclusive, just as War Is Hell and War Is Glorious aren't. You need to define your villain before you answer his questions.