War can be associated with ownership of value as much as it can be tied down to human nature. The fear of losing value that which one perceives to own is, in fact, a stimulant of war. The perceived threat to the value owned inspires one to seek constantly ways to defend that value. Sometimes defending that value calls for intrusion into others’ value. The rationale for this ideology is security. Warfare’s that are related to ownership of property can be explained by this concept. According to Margaret Mead first view of warfare, stating it as the lack of universality being a cause of war. The position aligns with the ideology that differences in opinion between parties cause wars when they are irresolvable. The idea can be challenged by the argument the ideological difference are often caused by other variable factors. The variable factor is always a sense of owning value and protecting that value. Therefore, any ideology that challenges degree of that value is perceived as an enemy and is challenged by a preemptive defense. These ideological differences are always manifested in the struggle for land and other natural resources.

The ideology of securing value as a stimulant of war forms a pivot point between the two views that Margaret Mead points out. The first view being the lack of universality between different social sectors and the second view being that war is caused by unavoidable concomitant of the development of nations, the struggle for land, and natural resources. The two arguments converge on the point of competition for value. The value can be examined regarding either material things like property or immaterial aspects like beliefs and values.