Prior to the 1960s, war was considered to be the product of industrialized nations and civilizations. It was thought that civilizations fighting for territory and religion were the only wars ever fought. The first wars were for territory, and when more religions sprouted up, there were wars over religions. Anthropologists thought that tribes and villages were peaceful, and were not affiliated with a warfare culture. All tribes they encountered were relatively peaceful, and were even compliant to researchers.
They were wrong.
Small tribes had to be gathering resources, hunting and gathering were the primary focus. But, once a tribe has gotten big, say a couple villages, resources plentiful, and population stable, the culture shifts. All of the tribes researched prior to the 60s had some sort of intervention with civilized society. In fact, there was evidence that tribes were violent, like the Sioux, Cherokee, and Utes. But those examples weren’t ever used to prove that even tribes had warring states. In fact, they were blatantly disregarded as proof. (That pisses me off, since I myself am 1/4 Native American, Pueblo Indian, so they didn’t disregard my ancestry, but still offended.) there was no specific reason why this evidence wasn’t classified as proof, but I think it was civil unrest toward Native Americans.
The tribe studied which brought this subject up for debate was the Yanomamö tribe. Napoleon Chagnon studied them, totally surprised by their culture. They pretty much adopted civilized culture when the closest form of it was on the opposite side of the globe. South America was full of tribes that faced close to no civilized intervention, but still had wars, culture of honor, similar religions, even the same weapons. The bows and arrows in the Americas were way beyond their time, and more efficient than the firearms made until the late 1800s. Clubs they made were similar to maces, and blades they made were very sharp and help edges after impact, like primitive swords.
The Yanomamö wars were primarily over women, the Men were concerned with honor, and had a sort of culture based off of reputation and nobility. This organization was so similar to feudal Europe, it inspire Napoleon Chagnon to name the book he wrote about the Yanomamö, “Noble Savages”.
Wars are fought for many reasons, but the most profound reason they are fought is for religion. The Crusades and the constant wars between Spain, France, and England were over Christianity. Wars over Jihad are being fought today in the Middle East. Nearly every religion has been fought over, even Buddhism. Hell, if you consider Atheism a religion, it also has a substantial kill count, among the highest, but Atheists have always been stubborn in claiming Atheism is not a religion, but that is for another time. My point is, even atheism isn’t immune to wars fueled by belief.
But war has been proven to be a catalyst in innovation. Anthropologists still debate whether which was made first, weapons or tools? Tools would make sense, but weapons make more sense. The fact is, weapons made for killing game and rival tribes were tweaked to become tools, or something vice versa. But that fact alone should prove that innovation is fueled by war.
The most profound and incredible example of this was Nazi Germany. Ever since Adolf Hitler took control of Germany, he built his military up, while spending a lot of money and time researching to make his weapons better. The research done made some of the first ballistic missiles, the most efficient bombs, and the first stealth technology. The easiest way to prove how ahead the nazis were was occasionally the Nazis would bomb warships, and the bombs would be so aerodynamic and so fast that they would often tear through warships and sink into the sea before exploding. The bombs were too aerodynamic and fast for the warships to handle. They also made some of the most dangerous tanks in history, and equally dismal planes. Some even argue that Nazi Germany was only defeated because of the enemies’ sheer numbers, Britain, France, the United States, and of course Soviet Russia.
If the world was warless, there would be a strangulation on innovation. Whether it be war on religion or war over territory, war is the mother of innovation, while necessity is the father.