After reading Stanislav Andreski's essay on the human race, and it's dependence on limited resources. Which he believes ultimately leads to war between nation states and within the nation state itself. I have come to agreement with Mr. Andreski's theory.
             Andreski begins by looking at some other beliefs of what cause war within the human race. He focuses attention to the theory of human nature causing war, which he partially agrees with. However, he than continues into his second paragraph by refuting this idea of human nature. He states that if man kinds aggression towards one another was a natural desire such sexual satisfaction or eating than their would be no nation state that has not been in war for more than a century. Nations such as, Switzerland, Sweden, Norway and Denmark are all examples. Thus, it would seem that there is more to mans aggression than a natural instinct.
             In reference to Andreski's statement that the only peaceful place in the world, Scandinavia is due to the fact that there is no poverty in the country. When one has everything that is necessary to be in compliance with his or her life there is no need to become aggressive toward one another. In contrast when a resource that is widely used by a certain species of animal becomes rare animals will become aggressive and compete with one another for that resource.
             Andreski than uses this idea in relation to the way that society's become aggressive or divided. He sites that when an industrial societies unemployment goes up there will large numbers of poverty stricken people, stirring to have a place in society or assurance of survival will lead to aggressive or violent struggle. This is backed by historical fact.
             ...