I was watching some junk on netflix, and in one scene a warrior character was staring thoughtfully at a painting. The painting was a classical warfare themed piece, guy on horse, bloodied sabre, dead and routed enemies, the usual. It struck me that if I had been standing beside the warrior character, both of us looking at the painting, my experience of it would have been vastly different from theirs because I have zero experience of war.
Then I realised that we’ve been, at least in the west, members of probably the first generations who have lived their entire lives without first-hand experience of war, in all of human history. At least if you take ww2 as the last war that embraced an entire generation, rather than only parts of it.
Anyway, was wondering what you thought about this, and how you think this situation has made our generation(s) different from our parent’s/grandparent’s.
Experience of war is multi faceted and any conflict can severely affect national well being regardless of how big or small it is
We are now more critical of empire but whether that is a consequence of relative peace or political correctness I cannot say
It would be interesting to ask all the men here who have never actually fought for their country if they would if it was required of them
I would not because I am a born coward but had I been born at another time I might have a different answer though I cannot be certain
Do men become more feminised when their generation is not exposed to war - I have absolutely no idea but either way the answer would not surprise me
There are many ways to assert ones masculinity without having to go to war but to lay down your life for your country is the greatest thing a man can do
Let’s not throw concepts of femininity and masculinity into this. They do not exist as absolutes. There are behaviour patterns and physical traits that society associates with the archetype ‘male’, and behaviour patterns and physical traits that society associates with the archetype ‘female’.
You might not think that’s an important qualification of terms, but wow, it so is, believe me. You would not believe the millions of words thrown about in the past concerning this topic.
I was thinking more of a missing point of commonality of experience in peacetime societies. War is a great leveller - rich people go to war, poor people go to war. Men and women are affected, those of all religions too.
My myer-briggs personality type is the mediator/ peace maker. So I have a strong bias for harmony. That said, I feel that I am surrounded by a majority of people who use peacetime to prepare the next war. Since everything changes, is their excuse.
Anyway, I don’t debate much on ILP because I seek agreement, while other personality types seek to sharpen their debate skills above all else.
The ironic part of any of this, the video game I’ve devoted the most hours to is Battlefield 4. So basically, in concept, I still support the idea of war. I guess I should have faith in the way things are.
Sport does bring people together, but jets fly over the stadium before the game starts. So the question is unite for what, towards what, an enemy? Maybe that’s what you were suggesting, that people are more patriotic during wartime. The flags come out on doorsteps more.
Concentrations of power, city by city, then countrywide, invisible borders to be enforced, ect.
Then of course, the need for secret keeping, against other nations, which is really about keeping one’s own citizens in the dark.
Right about now the only thing that would unite us in worldly peace would be a universal enemy of the alien variety.
It made pansies, freeloaders, god-damned COMMUNISTS - oh wait of course the Commies won us WWII.
No but seriously. For generations post-war in families who have been enveloped entirely in war, horrors and possibly victories and all, it is not possible to not be aware of the vicious nature of he human species and have some deep anxiety over this. I see it split people into two groups; ultra-pacifists, and ultra-vigilants. I count myself among the latter.
Actually theres war whenever you open your eyes and step out of your comfort zone these days. Wars are fought nowadays with very interesting means, too. Its dangerous out there if you’re awake. And it gets weird quick once you approach the sources of danger.
But then, the most dangerous thing to do is to turn your back on danger.
And that, probably, is the “Peacetime Social Psyche”. The neurotic back-turning masses, consumed with fear of their own shadows.
But that is not really true, Tab. Since the Second World War, there have been many /soldiers/warriors from this country who have been/had been engaged in and fought for peace and freedom willingly. Some of those were actually called Wars. The fighting did not take place in the same lands but don’t forget…
So not every man or woman in this country can say: My experience of it would have been vastly different from theirs because I have zero experience of war." Many would probably, in fact, be able to experience more or less what that warrior character experienced though perhaps some of the dynamics would be different or maybe not. If we could only hear the conversations between them and that "warrior character…
We sometimes like to laugh in here because one’s experience of having fought in a war (as Patton said: “War is hell”) gives/gave one quite a different philosophical and existential view on life. What is the saying" “Grant that I might not judge my neighbor until I have walked a mile in his moccasins”.
The problem with this country is that we feel far too safe and secure or we tend to lie to ourselves that we are. Live turns on a dime and the more secure we feel, the more unsafe we really are. Perhaps we do not feel so safe anymore.
Hey Arc, sure yes, many wars fought since ww2. Korea, Vietnam, middle east et al, and I’m not diminishing those conflicts nor the people who fought and died in them.
I was just pointing out that ww2 was the last war where everyone fought. Whole generations of men in europe conscripted, women mobilized in industry, children evacuated to the countryside. A broad society wide effect. A common point in time shared by all.
I/we/our genteration live our lives within a certain range of experience - our highs are X high, our lows are Y low. A war generation’s low would be waaaaay lower than ours. I was wondering how that changed a person, a society. If we’re missing something critical, if the price is too high, I dunno, ilp doesn’t seem to have many old people hanging around. Perhaps it’s too late to know.
I think she would concur that it is never too late.
That is what the flower children would herald if they would still be able to recognize the urgency. The intelligentsia has no longer a bite without the teeth that children’s hunger can elicit.
Having a mandatory National Service, would definitely put the grrr back into our males, and also deal with the situation of gun and knife crime by default.
Israel has roughly 2 years mandatory service for them, and roughly 3 years for men.
Whereas women do not generally fight on the front lines but are employed in more protective jobs, their service does cultivate vigilance and value-awareness in them.
There is something very wholesome about that country that our old fashioned nations seem to lack.
My suggestion was that of a solution to the current UK knife crime crisis, of which I am unaware of any females having committed said crimes… the young and unruly males, whom were not in Further or Higher Education, would be automatically drafted up and morals and values instilled in them, but I am not sure that mandatory National Service for females is necessary for every Nation, but that would be a discussion that would need to be had by that Nation.
A couple of years back I had shared this video in a private Facebook group, and am very well aware of female participation in warfare a’la Britain in WW2 and other wars.
AMAZING: Kurdish female soldiers dancing in Raqqa after defeating ISIS, on streets where ISIS bought and sold women. There was obviously a need for these female soldiers to fight that fight, but many Nations had that fight, and such practices resolved, a long time ago… necessity should fuel requirement.
They were Russian nurses and female soldiers serving on the Eastern Front during WWII alongside the men
Russian women were also employed in factories and so produced five times as many tanks as the Germans
German women by contrast were not allowed to serve at the Front as Hitler thought that was not a suitable role for them
The Russians however did not think in such sterotypical terms and had another advantage in the sheer quantity of numbers
Hitler had very firm ideas about women but it would not have mattered anyway given the relative size of the two countries
You would not believe the millions of words thrown about in the past concerning this topic.