"Either war is obsolete, or men are"
About this Quote
R. Buckminster Fuller presents a survival choice, not a metaphor. Once industrial modernity culminated in nuclear weapons, war ceased to be a tool of policy and became a species-level suicide mechanism. The escalation curve of destructive capacity outstrips any possible political gain; the cost of error is total. By saying war is obsolete, he applies a design term: an old technology rendered irrational by superior alternatives and intolerable risks.
Fuller was a systems thinker of the Cold War era who spoke of Spaceship Earth, ephemeralization, and synergy. He argued that humanity could do more with less and that we already possess the technical capacity to meet everyone’s needs if we design our systems accordingly. War, in his view, arose from perceived scarcity and the competitive nation-state model. If scarcity can be alleviated through better design and global coordination, the primary driver of conflict dissolves. He urged a reallocation from weaponry to livingry: redirect the ingenuity and resources used to perfect destruction into housing, education, infrastructure, and ecological stewardship.
The stark either/or framing functions as a moral and engineering imperative. It says that survival now depends on upgrading our social technologies as urgently as our physical ones. Diplomacy, international institutions, and cooperative economics are not merely idealistic; they are the only workable operating system for a tightly coupled planet. He saw the choice as Utopia or Oblivion, another of his phrases: either the deliberate design of a world that works for everyone, or the default trajectory toward annihilation.
The line also critiques complacency. Treating war as inevitable becomes self-fulfilling. Treating it as obsolete requires making it unnecessary through abundance, transparency, and mutual advantage. Fuller’s challenge is to the imagination and to policy: redesign incentives, retool economies, and scale empathy to the planetary level. If we fail to do so, it is not war that disappears. It is us.
Fuller was a systems thinker of the Cold War era who spoke of Spaceship Earth, ephemeralization, and synergy. He argued that humanity could do more with less and that we already possess the technical capacity to meet everyone’s needs if we design our systems accordingly. War, in his view, arose from perceived scarcity and the competitive nation-state model. If scarcity can be alleviated through better design and global coordination, the primary driver of conflict dissolves. He urged a reallocation from weaponry to livingry: redirect the ingenuity and resources used to perfect destruction into housing, education, infrastructure, and ecological stewardship.
The stark either/or framing functions as a moral and engineering imperative. It says that survival now depends on upgrading our social technologies as urgently as our physical ones. Diplomacy, international institutions, and cooperative economics are not merely idealistic; they are the only workable operating system for a tightly coupled planet. He saw the choice as Utopia or Oblivion, another of his phrases: either the deliberate design of a world that works for everyone, or the default trajectory toward annihilation.
The line also critiques complacency. Treating war as inevitable becomes self-fulfilling. Treating it as obsolete requires making it unnecessary through abundance, transparency, and mutual advantage. Fuller’s challenge is to the imagination and to policy: redesign incentives, retool economies, and scale empathy to the planetary level. If we fail to do so, it is not war that disappears. It is us.
Quote Details
| Topic | War |
|---|
More Quotes by Buckminster Fuller
Add to List
