If we approached setting up our societies in a scientific manner as complex systems that require tuning for specific goals then it would be no issue at all. Framing societal design in a moral framework has always been one of the main issues preventing humanity from progressing toward a better future.

Only if you use the narrowest definition of peace imaginable.

It isn't the activists saying that. It's the decades of evidence that no rational discourse can be had. Optimists severely lack evidence to support their arguments, and you all simply refuse to acknowledge that.

Once again, he has provided real world evidence and examples to support his argument. You have not. You seem to be assuming that people are just going to go along with your blind optimism because the default in your mind is to just accept toxic positivity. Nope.

You misspelled delusional.

His points have vastly more evidence behind them than yours. Positive, negative, or otherwise, the argument with the most evidence is usually the best one.