The Healing of Nations and the Hidden Sources of Their StrifeCarpenter, Edward
History
The Healing of Nations and the Hidden Sources of Their Strife
Carpenter, Edward
World War, 1914-1918
Nevertheless, and despite these other considerations, there does
certainly remain, in this as in other wars, a fair number of men among
those who enlist who are _bonâ fide_ inspired by some Ideal which they
feel to be worth fighting for. It may be Patriotism or love of their
country; it may be "to put down militarism"; it may be Religion or
Honour or what not. And it is fine that it should be so. They may in
cases be deluded, or mistaken about facts; the ideal they fight for may
be childish (as in the mediaeval Crusades); still, even so it is fine
that people should be willing to give their lives for an idea--that they
should be capable of being inspired by a vision. Humanity has at least
advanced as far as that.
I suppose patriotism, or love of country--when it comes to its full
realization, as in the case of invasion by an enemy, is the most
powerful and tremendous of such ideals, sweeping everything before it.
It represents something ingrained in the blood. In that case all the
other motives for fighting--economic or what not--disappear and are
swallowed up. Material life and social conditions under a German
government might externally be as comfortable and prosperous as under
our own, but for most of us something in the soul would wither and
sicken at the thought.
Anyhow, whatever the motives may be which urge _individuals_ into
war--whether sheer necessity or patriotism, or the prospect of wages or
distinction, or the love of adventure--a nation or a people in order to
fight _must_ have a "cause" to fight for, something which its public
opinion, its leaders, and its Press can appropriate--some phrase which
it can inscribe on its shield: be it "Country" or "God" or "Freedom from
Tyranny," or "Culture _versus_ Barbarism." It must have some such cry,
else obviously it could not fight with any whole-heartedness or any
force.
The thing is a psychological necessity. Every one, when he gets into a
quarrel, justifies himself and accuses the other party. He puts his own
conduct in an ideal light, and the conduct of his opponent in the
reverse! Doubtless if we were all angels and could impartially enter
into all the origins of the quarrel, we should not fight, because to
"understand" would be to "forgive"; but as we have not reached that
stage, and as we cannot even explain why we are quarrelling--the matter
being so complex--we are fain to adopt a phrase and fight on the
strength of that. It is useless to call this hypocrisy. It is a
psychological necessity. It is the same necessity which makes a mistress
dismiss her maid on the score of a broken teapot, though really she has
no end of secret grievances against her; or which makes the man of
science condense the endless complexity of certain physical phenomena
into a neat but lying formula which he calls a _Law of Nature_. He could
not possibly give all the real facts, and so he uses a phrase.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account