I'm Feeling Thoughtful · 9:57pm Aug 20th, 2014
I'm not a historian, but something about what I just read has left me depressed, thoughtful, and more than a little frustrated.
You may or may not know that this year is the centennial of the First Great War: World War 1, that "War to End All Wars" as we so cynically call it. In the middle of all the horror and atrocities going on right now, it's hard to remember that one hundred years ago, around thirty-seven million men, women and children were eaten up in the greatest armed conflict humanity had ever seen. It toppled empires, left scars that haven't even come close to healing, and in many ways set us down the road that led to the exact conflicts we're fighting today.
The Atlantic recently rolled out a commemorative issue for the war that I bought on a whim, since World War 1 has always had a special place in my heart: in spite of the sheer scale and the changes it wrought, hardly a man alive knows or even cares that it was even fought. Time marched on and left the bones where they fell and man's fierce dispositions were not dulled, but inspired to even greater feats of savagery. The Atlantic brought together several excerpts from many different people who wrote about a variety of subjects, from the home front to the causes of war to the diaries of the men in the trenches. There's even an article about meteorologists debating whether or not the sheer amount of explosions going on in Europe was causing climate change. Go figure: you think arguing about the weather is something new? Something only liberal scientists or conservative think tanks brought up? No, no, what fascinated me about this issue is that it brought home a sobering reality: that the problems of yesteryear were discussed with the same fervor, the same ignorance, the same wisdom, and the same alacrity as they are today. We have come no closer to answering the questions these people asked now than they did.
Whether or not a war is fought for "the right reasons" is something that haunts a nation's psyche. America has been involved in dozens of wars in its short history. Whether or not any or all were "just" is something we still wrangle with.
To denounce war as a crime is to denounce something which a nation when it is entering a war never thinks it is committing. Invariably in modern times a nation goes to war to stop another nation from committing the crime of war. As the Austrians saw it in 1914, they did not make war on Serbia. They believed they were acting to preent Serbia, backed by Russia, from making a criminal attempt to destroy the Austrian empire. The Germans did not make war upon Russia. They made war to prevent Russia from making war. The French did not make war. They defended themselves. The British did not make war. They stopped an aggression. We [the Americans] did not make war. We tried to make the world safe for democracy ... The choice as it presents itself is not between the crime of war and the righteousness of peace, but between ruin and disgrace on the one hand, and self-preservation, courage, and honor on the other.
-Walter Lippmann, in a short titled "War Is Someone Else's Fault," originally, "The Political Equivalent of War," 1928.
There will never be a magnanimous discussion on war. There will always be "that side," "those people," "the ones who started it." Even The Atlantic provides absolutely zero diaries or letters or papers from German and Austrian and Russian writers, though perhaps it was just more difficult to get them. When we talk about The War, we talk almost exclusively of World War 2, wherein we fought a great battle for freedom and liberty against genocide and oppression. Yet not decades after that war we supported, both financially and militarily, utterly despicable men who visited death on their countries, in the name of preserving order or peace. We like to talk about how we might be masters of realpolitik or how the United Nations was supposed to save the world. We talk about the advancement of freedom across the globe. We were selfless and good and without blame.
But we forget that in World War 1 we fought for the exact same things, or at least many people wanted to believe it.
In a war involving the nations of five continents, the United States alone fights without expectation, without desire for reward other than the common security of the seven seas. For herself alone she demands absolutely nothing. She enters the struggle purely for a world idea. France, most heroic of nations, fights for her life; Russia for power; Italy and Roumania for territory; unhappy Serbia and Belgium because their rights as nations are destroyed; England because her empire, even her existence, is at stake; the Central Powers, from a coarse mingling of fear and greed; but if we fight, we fight because a world ordered like this one is intolerable to all, remote and near. In such a world, security, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are forever impossible.
-Ellery Sedgewick, 1917
And we all know where fighting this great war to establish peace ended up.
My husband was born in the United States; he never saw Germany, he does not even speak German with fluency. His father, like so many of his countrymen, left his native country that he might have freedom of speech, of life ... My husband came home [after learning about the sinking of the Lusitania] exhilarated by a dark passion ... The passengers should not have sailed, he said: they had been warned. It was their responsibility, and they must take the consequences. The war had been forced on Germany, and it was justifiable for her to do whatever would enable her to win it ... The strangest part of it all is this: my husband had, until this war, been a particularly kind and tender-hearted man. He thus seems to represent in his own person a nation changed and obsessed by the false ideal held up before it ... I could no longer maintain neutrality. I cried out against such doctrines—against teaching our sons such things. It was horrible. Our family peace was gone. After 18 years of dwelling with us love had fled.
-M.L.S, 1917
Cold in Gardez recently featured this blog about rightness or wrongness of action and inaction. It doesn't provide any answers. What man can? Who can say if we allowed Germany to win that World War 2 would have been averted? If ISIS wouldn't exist if we just left Saddam Hussein to torture his own people? If Russia and China wouldn't be threatening our supremacy if we had used The Bomb on them when we had the chance?
All I can say is this: after reading that magazine, all I can conclude is that military action is simply trading loss of life in one place for what would have been loss of life in some other place. Millions of people who had nothing to do with the war died regardless in World War 1. There was rape, torture, and famine in this most just war like in any other. Millions of people are in danger of dying right now, too, in spite of all the bombs we dropped.
But taken from the long view, everyone dies eventually. We could stop fighting every war right now and everyone committing atrocities in Syria and Sudan and Iraq will still die sooner or later. Hitler will always replace the Kaiser who replaced the Holy Roman Empire, which, while not Hitler, also fought wars that killed millions for reasons just as petty and greedy. As have all nations across the face of the earth.
So what do we gain from this long blog post? Well, just my rambling about the state of the world, and hopefully a greater understanding of how terrible war is, no matter what reason it's fought for. Eventually, I understand we have to fight. I'd never just sit down and die while someone nearby suffers—or at least, we all hope we won't. But don't entertain foolish notions that what happens in a war is "good." I suppose it's part of my beliefs as a Christian: humanity is not ultimately supposed to die. Speeding that along with violence and hatred is always a tragedy.
Which, I suppose, is another reason I'm so in love with ponies.
Yeah, I like that. This entire post reaffirms my love of ponies. Why? Because ponies actually try to be good even in a world that hurts them. That's more than can be said for a lot of us.
Tl;dr: Friendship is magic. It can, and does, change your life. Make peace wherever you can, and if violence is the only option, remember to try and stay human, and never be too eager to assign blame. Narrow is the road that leads to life, and it is all too easy to be swept from it.
The history of the world shows a see-saw pattern of incredible evil and transcendent good. It seems that for every Hitler there is a Mandela, and for every Gandhi a Pol Pot. It would be very easy to call it all 'a wash' and give up on striving for goodness or evil, and as individuals we are faced with the everyday decisions that fractionally add weight to one side or the other.
Me, I'm an optimist. I believe to my very core that humanity is perfectible, and that despite evidence that sometimes casts doubt on our capacity to learn, I still believe in my heart that we are learning and improving. Some of the signs are subtle, but I think the very existence and popularity of something like MLP:fim is one of the signs that "good" is making headway.
Fully agreed. That's all I have to say - I fully agree with you.
I'm probably either highly unreflective on indefatigably hopeful for not really being bothered by this question. Maybe it's 'cause I think I already have the answers, however mysterious they are.
It's easy for us to be overwhelmed by the multiplicity of forces beyond our control. The questions asked about the West's involvement in foreign conflicts is a mark of this. Yet, shouldn't we first worry about how our own actions can contribute to greater peace? If there is evil in society, it is because evil exists in our hearts. Therefore, if we wish to end war between nations, we must end conflict between neighbours.
Yes, it's definitely easier said than done, but the knowledge of the solution is distinct from the uncertainty of the application: we try, we fail, we try again, but the goal remains clear, and while the future consequences are unknown we are still capable of trying to do what is right regardless.
Finally, I have to address this since you profess to be a Christian: Christ has promised that, ultimately, good will prevail. We shouldn't be given to worries and fears about the dark times or even the way in which good intentions can be twisted into bad results. We have to trust in the Lord. Do what is right and just, and everything else will follow, even if we can't see it for a long time, or even our lifetimes.
I only saw this journal just this morning, and coincidentally a few hours later my dad started waxing philosophical on the same subject.
"Solomon said, 'There's nothing new under the sun.' ...We're all just stumbling along, generation after generation, all repeating the same mistakes and asking the same questions. Hold that tape measure. And still every new generation thinks they're somehow unique with their special problems."
war is inevitable because it just conflict(no matter human going find difference to fight or make new one) just life and death, I found best to do is find quickest way to end it.
Peace, ha what Plebeian dream