Militarism is similarly misguided. War is cruel; and the sort of bravery required to overcome the natural hesitation at killing another human being is the sort that is sadly necessary in war, but not something to be applauded (in civil life, killing another person is murder).
Also, almost all wars are unjust, no matter what the govt. propaganda is trying to sell it as just war. (It’s interesting that even Hitler, with his wide support in the German population, and his aggressive land-taking ideology, still found it necessary to stage an incident to appear not as aggressor attacking, but as victim defending). There will be a lot of talk about defending one’s own country from aggression - often by preemptively attacking the enemy, or attacking a minor enemy when the main enemy is not possible - or defending some third country - ally or innocent weak nation - from an aggressor.
The problem is that war always kills civilians, esp. the modern war which is mainly done with aerial bombs*, so claiming to defend the civilians with soldiers is on very shaky grounds.
The other problem is when you embrace militarism, believing that war is heroic, soldiers are heroes and are not only fighting battles with other people, but mythical battles for freedom and liberty and democracy, you surrender first the critical approach of “Do we need to go to war to solve this problem or are there other options?” (the “If you only have a hammer, every problem looks like a nail” attitude); and secondly, by ideolozing the soldiers you lack the safeguards like the Geneva convention to make sure things like My Lai and Abu Ghraib don’t happen again and again.
If your soldiers consider themselves as citizens in uniform, that is, critical and democratic, that’s better than having paid people (basically mercenaries) doing a job that involves killing people by obeying orders without question.
No matter what the US propaganda tells you, bombs are never smart enough to avoid civilian causalities, for several reasons. (See here for example)
No, they aren’t. American patriotism lead to the internment of Niseis for Pearl Harbour. Do you call that useful or good? Later, after WWII, American patriotism lead to the Communist Witchhunt. Was that useful or good? American militarism meant that race barriers for the blacks were lifted during WWII because of need, but things went back to segregation again after it ended. Was that useful or good?
Moreover, it wasn’t US patriotism that decided to oppose those bad dictatorships. US patriotism didn’t prevent the US refusing ships full of Jews fleeing persecution entrance, because the quota was full. And US patriotism was unconcerned with Europe until Pearl Harbor, because what happened outside the US was not important. Just because Hollywood and govt. propaganda spreads the myth that the US entered WWII to defend freedom and bring democracy by overthrowing tyrants, doesn’t mean that was the real reason; rather, it was defense against an attack, and Europe was along for the ride.
Patriotism and militarism are not tools for good, they are tools that appeal to the stupid and are therefore always used by populists.
Wonderful. You sound like Morgenthau here. So the Americans can keep being patriotistic against all brown-looking people, and militaristic by invading every country they need geo-strategically, as long as Germany stays quiet? Yes, that’s a good recipe for peace on Earth.
It was patriotism that got Americans to the recruiting office, it was patriotism that got them building so many planes, ships and tanks, it was patriotism that got them to fight. You can replace “Americans” with “Russians” or “British”, too. Governments may or may not be motivated by patriotism, but the people certainly are.
I’m not American.
I don’t know who Morgenthau is.
World peace is too big a goal for me to grasp. Personally, as a Jew, my greatest foreign policy concern is that the Germans don’t revert to their old selves.
So I’m not going to try and convince you, because I don’t want you to change your mind.
American workers didn’t get paid in the military industry? There was not a severe recession in the 30s that was ended half by Roosevelt measures, but fully when the military industry ramped up production for Britains lend-lease and needed thousands of workers? That’s news to me.
As for recruitment: I don’t have the numbers, but weren’t many people who registered for the military recent immigrants who wanted to get citizenship that way.
Patriotism also lead to people who looked Japanese being jumped on their way to the recruiting station, because they “were the enemy”.
And you don’t see the problem with American patriotism and militarism in the last and this century?
He’s the guy who proposed turning Germany into farmland after WWII.
Because like you apparently, he believed that the only trouble came from the Germans, not from a mindset that can be found everywhere and needs to be dealt with.
Ah, that explains it: you’re not American yourself, but profit from the unquestioning support of US patriotism and militarism to Israel and therefore don’t see the many problems it causes.
It seems you can’t grasp the problem that patriotism and militarism has caused, or that it’s a problem with every nation. Sad, because this way you will continue suffering and problems.
I don’t believe in “My Country right or wrong”. If say my country planned a genocide I would oppose it and work against it. While its true, that too much patriotism or militarism may have caused the German army not to see the evils of Nazism, it should be noted most people go along with their neighbours even if they’re fairly apathetic not to mention that many of Hitler’s actions at least in the beginning appeared justified (ie trying to reunite Germans in Austria, Danzig, and Sudetenland).
It might give them a stronger sense of national unity and give Germans a pride in their heritage and purpose in their lives while at the same time helping immigrants assimilate with a more definate national culture and enabling a more vigourous foreign policy.
Even restricting the discussion to music and literature, I think that German culture already has a tremendous pride in its heritage that is entirely justified.
Let’s see: a “stronger sense of national unity” combined with “a more vigourous foreign policy”. That’s the mindset of those Germans that want the territories back that we lost after WW II (but maybe, to you that would appear to be justified, just like “trying to reunite Germans in Austria, Danzig, and Sudetenland” then). I tell you, our neighbors, especially Poland, would be delighted by such a change of paradigm in German policy…
And I pity anyone who feels the need for patriotism to give purpose to their personal life. Really.
Finally, do you think that a sense of national consciousness and culture is dependent on patriotism? If yes, why? And please explain how the assimilation of immigrants is helped by increasing patriotism and militarism.
We have the yahoos here who have American flags flapping from every window in their car, with American flag stickers on their bumpers. I guess they are trying to tell me they are more American than I am, or perhaps they want me to know they live in the USA (while driving next to me here in Nevada).
We have redneck yahoos who have Confederate flags flapping from every window in their trucks, with Confederate flag stickers on their bumpers. I guess they are trying to tell me they are more of an asshole racist than I am, and damned proud of it to boot.
Fixated, extremist fanatics are a danger in every country.