The results of this cross-cultural study suggest that war may be caused mostly by a fear of nature and a partially resultant fear of others. A history of unpredictable natural disasters strongly predicts more war, as does socialization for mistrust (but less strongly). It seems that people, particularly in nonstate societies, may try to protect themselves against future disasters by going to war to take resources from enemies.

No abstract

This cross-cultural study investigates why some societies have more interpersonal violence (homicide, assault) than others. Multiple regression analysis suggests that socialization for aggression in boys in late childhood is by far the strongest socialization predictor of higher rates of homicide and assault. But why socialize boys for aggression? Other analyses suggest that socialization for aggression is a likely consequence, not a cause, of war. The theory of violence suggested here is that war is the major cause of more homicide/assault. We suggest that the effect of war is mostly indirect, by motivating parents to socialize for aggression. In addition, war may have some direct effect by legitimizing violence. According to the theory suggested here, high rates of homicide/assault are inadvertent (unintended) consequences of the need to produce effective and unambivalent warriors.

This paper presents and discusses codes for the Murdock/White (1969) sample societies. The codes measure warfare frequencies (internal, external, and overall); land and nonland resources taken during war; individual and socially organized aggression (homicide, assault, theft, trespass, suicide); and unpredictable and pre dictable resource problems

Evidence is accumulating that, in the modern international system, democracies rarely fight each other. But the reasons for the phenomenon are not well understood. This article explores a similar phenomenon in other societies, using cross-cultural ethnographic evidence. It finds that polities organized according to more participatory (“democratic”) principles fight each other less often than do polities organized according to hierarchical principles. Stable participatory institutions seem to promote peaceful relations, especially if people perceive that others also have some control over politics.