My grandfather on my mum's side tried to enlist to WWI, but was rejected as he was too young, being only fourteen or fifteen. He was deemed too old to go to WWII, and with a young family, instead trained military engineers. A quarter of the world away in Malaysia, my grandfather on my dad's side during WWII, also with a young family, was postmaster and a key part of an underground network helping escaped POWs get out of the country.
Why did they do this?
I can't say for sure for my grandad in Australia, as I was too young to ever talk to him about these things before he passed. but talking with my dad about his father, it was because it was the right thing to do. Not only that, it was because they had seen some of the horrors of war from the civilian perspective (my dad saw some very terrible things as a child) and felt that something had to be done to protect themselves, others, their country and humanity. My dad was what you might call an eternal pacifist.
Last night I was writing about large scale global conflict to put to bed the military superpowers of the world, as they are taking this opportunity to expand their reach, because people do not have the appetite for large scale war. A conflict in Ukraine over a sliver of land, an attack on Venezuela to depose a dictator, an incursion into Taiwan? These small actions seem to be tolerated, with little more than some toothless economic sanctions that do nothing, and some spoken condemnation. But if it were to expand into larger action, who has the appetite?
After eighty-odd years of "the long peace" in Europe, the generation that experienced the true horror of war have largely disappeared, but the leadership are the children and grandchildren of those survivors. People who didn't see the war, but still feel like they did in some way, and still have this sense of nationalistic pride. But is it pride, or protection? After all, after tens of millions of deaths, there was also an unprecedented economic boom, which led to all kinds of innovations and growth, but more importantly perhaps, it allowed a couple generations to become wealthy, to become owners, to control the flow of resources at the global level. Do they care about protecting their country, or do they care about their wealth?
Consider where they pay their tax and hide their money for the answer.
The problem is, that while the decisions that lead to war are an old person's game, wars are fought by young people, and the young do not have the same appetite, nor sense of duty that was present in the past. In the "for war" countries, the majority of young can't afford to own a house, have a family, pay their education, or live without being in debt. Essentially, they don't have any resource stake in the country, so what they would have to be willing to protect, is their way of life.
But, without ownership, living in debt, being disappointed by society, being overweight, ill, mentally unstable and all kinds of other issues, are they willing to die to protect their way of life for other people? Because that is what it takes to protect a way of life through large scale war; A willingness to die for others. After all, a dead person has no way of life to live, so the beneficiaries are those who live past the war.
And as I have stated many times prior, young people today aren't willing to commit to a partner, a career, a product or anything else. They want their freedom of choice, but are they willing to die for the freedoms they currently enjoy, when their freedom has left them as renters, as dependents, living in debt in the basement of their parent's home.
I suspect not.
The greed of industry owners has led not only to a concentration of wealth in fewer hands, but it has also catalysed social disconnection, empowering individualism for profit. This has been hyper-sped over the last two decades as social media, smart devices and a constant stream of content driven by outrage engagement through polarisation and identity claims, has created an ideological vacuum. Everyone is in a different boat, rowing in different directions. This means that there is no general "way of life" for people to collect around to protect, meaning that people would have to be willing to amass and cooperate with people they do not connect with on any common cause, to protect something individual in their life that they see is worth dying for. This also means that if they see it worth protecting, it doesn't mean there is any beneficiary for their death, because not many people may value the same thing.
Consider this scenario:
An individual who is willing to die to protect transgender rights as it is the most important thing in their life, would also have to be willing to cooperate and fight alongside people who are willing to die to protect their beliefs from transgender rights. And neither of them own a house, have a family, and both are swimming in debt, with little career prospects. With these last two perhaps the only reason they might go and fight - for money.
I suspect that the conditions required for young people to fight a large scale global war are just not there, as they are disenfranchised from society. There is no longer the sense of "do my part" in this society, because capital-driven individualism has broken society apart. There is no one boat and all pulling in the same direction, there is no consensus on what is right or wrong, or what is worth dying or killing for.
so how is a global war to be fought?
Remotely.
Automated technology and long-range attacks launched from thousands of kilometres away, by a few people sitting in comfortable office chairs perhaps. But while this is possible, this would also create massive internal problems, as the face of war changes and once the attacks start external to a country, they begin internally also, often from people already within the country. People who ideologically oppose an action, with some group always ideologically opposed, no matter the action. And since there is no sense of togetherness, nor is there ownership, it effectively becomes an "all on all" situation, with no group having commitment to any other group and unable to even align for a shared common good.
Consider how much division there already is across so many topics that actually affect us and how little action there is made to improve. Consider how much apathy there is for positive action and support for initiatives, but how much complaint there is about the state of individual topics. People find meaning in their life by theoretically supporting the ideas of a movement, but for the most part, is only going to be done as a virtue signal for attention on social media. How many are willing to risk their lives for the movements they are so passionate about?
As I said in the other article, we are either going to have to have a large scale war that obliterates us all, or find a new way to live on this earth together, because the current trajectory obliterates us all anyway - just slowly. The appetite for military action might be in the hearts of those who don't have to act, but when it is their sons and daughters on the frontline, fighting a meaningless battle so that a few wealthy people can maintain their stranglehold on society, is the heart of the soldier still aligned?
Would the US government force people to fight through coercion like the Russian government does? Will they treat deserters similarly? Will they execute officers that fail to deliver results? Will Americans accept that?
I just don't see the cohesion necessary for country success likely, and any action without a clear common good behind it is going to create more division. So perhaps the only thing stopping us having a large scale global conflict, is our inability to agree on anything to make the world a better place, which also stops us from agreeing on fighting together. It is our lack of community, a crumbling society, the degradation of family and social network, and our desire for comfort, ease and convenience that protects us. But, it is also these things that has led to the situation we have, where the wealth keeps collecting at the top, and more and more people fall into poverty. Not just financial poverty, but poverty of human experience and wellbeing.
What are you willing to die for?
What are you living for?
Shouldn't they be the same thing?
Taraz
[ Gen1: Hive ]
Be part of the Hive discussion.
- Comment on the topics of the article, and add your perspectives and experiences.
- Read and discuss with others who comment and build your personal network
- Engage well with me and others and put in effort
And you may be rewarded.
I don't think it's just large scale war between nations that we're careening towards but here in the US we're also headed for a full-on civil war if we don't start finding some common ground. Here where I live (Minneapolis/St. Paul) sentiment is reflective of most of our country. The Dems and Republicans now exist in completely different realities, viewing the same set of circumstances in two different ways. Each are equally as extreme in their own ways. We have now have Governor activating the National Guard to maintain "public safety" and the risk of Trump activating the military and Insurrection Act to protect ICE agents from protestors. I pray this descalates somehow but it could go very, very badly.
What do I live for? I feel that we could be right on the precipice of a "golden age of humanity" where a lot of the struggles we've endured are behind us..if we can only make it there. This is what I live for, the hope that humanity survive this chaotic transition for the sake of all future generations. What would I die for? Certainly not any politician. Most wars are charades. I've lived long enough to know that very few of our politicians are working for the people but rather working for their own egos as well as being agents for those who donate the most money or have leverage over them.
I mentioned this the other day (and other times) and some think that it isn't even close to it. I am not as sure. Too many factions, with so many looking for relevance. And then depending on how things goes where you are, is going to impact all other states too, right?
It is about the only positive - and it is a very slim chance that we can make it there. There is plenty of potential, but most of it dies on the vine.
Even when there are decent politicians, the system isn't designed for decent results.
I think the situation is a little more dire than most people realize too. So many folks have been trapped in their echo chambers for so long they would need to be deprogrammed at this point to be able to see the middle-ground. At this point the issues are already spreading beyond Minnesota—California, Illinois, New York. ICE is reporting to have arrested 10,000 alone in the Twin Cities area but local judges are setting quite a number of the criminals free after arrest. Unfortunately ICE is arresting a fair number of innocents as well. I have to find a way to maintain some measure of optimism. This wave of tech coming will be like a tsunami and we'll have one chance to get it right. I totally agree with what you say about the system, it's rotten to the core, and corrupts every candidate it touches.
I wonder how many of the new age kids are even aware about their family tree or even the names of their forefathers. Those generational people have the ample experince and true insight about life. Kids have pretty less knowledge about history only on topics studied in school books. In todays time, I doubt nibba-nibbi kids ever bothered to fight or save one. They are interested in making reels and videos but never care to save somone from road accident or road rage. Most of the people are now living for themselves and nothing matter to them.
And they have been conditioned to be like this, because it maximises profits.
Salute to both your grandfathers. For me it was two of my uncles who served during the WWII. One in North Africa, the other in the Pacific. Neither talked about it, one I didn't know very well while alive anyway, but got to know more about him after his death and was amazed. What a generation. Not only those that fought, but those that supported, and stayed at home sacrificing through rationing and so forth.
Not sure today's generations could sacrifice for the common good like that again. In fact I am pretty sure they would not. It is a self centered society we have now and it would be be all about whats in it for them. Then again, I can't blame some off the younger generation, because they've pretty much been fucked by the older generations, especially those in government. Their future has been sacrificed to pad the pockets of the rich.
I would be interested to see what happens when the satellite tech is taken out in the first wave of attacks during a large scale war. Most of this tech becomes useless then.
It truly was a global conflict, with so many different groups, many non-fighting taking part.
And now the rich padding has led back to conflict, but with few willing to fight the wars for the rich.
Interesting about the satellites...
I know I said in the other comment that it feels like we are powerless. I honestly hate that feeling because as long as everyone else feels the same way, then you really are. As much as I hate the idea that we are just cruising towards this disaster with no recourse, it feels like that is still the case. I would say I could do my part by voting, but that feels like it doesn't really matter at this point either when neither of the options are good ones.
And even if there was a good option as an individual, there system doesn't change. The same issues will keep going around and around, more padded pockets, close to no improvement - let alone fast enough for what is required to avert disaster.
Yes, that feels like a very defeatist attitude to have. Probably what they are counting on, but it just feels hopeless.
Yep. I feel you.
Hmm, this topic is deep and I can say that the new generation doesn't know much about history and never cares to ask questions. War is nothing something a nation can just dabble in. It is beyond just wielding guns and ammunition. It is more of a mindset and readiness to die. No matter how strong a nation is fighting another there will also be a causation on both sides.
The difference between the older generation and the newer generation is wide as there are more sophisticated weapons in place as far as war is concerned as you said. Like the kind we witnessed in Nigeria recently when the US bombed a certain part of Nigeria especially the northern part remotely. They didn't have to engage in physical combat with the bandits. Once they get intelligence on where they were hiding then they carried their the heinous attack on them.
A lot of things caused the war, most of which are attributed to countries showing power and flexing their muscles which are often politically oriented.
The older generations are more of a countryman than the younger as they believe that without war,peace is not certain.
The problem is, it eventually comes back to bite and the loop is getting closed faster and faster.
I answered the two things you asked in my mind. They are two different things. I could die to protect the people I love, to fight against the occupation. But I can't say I live entirely for those things. I am mostly at the center of my life. Maybe it's because I'm not married yet.
Very possibly this is why you might not have as much will to fight either?
Most likely.
I think that rules change during wars. And US might not be that different from Russia if we went to war. Just recall camps for Japanese Americans during WW2...
And Americans are not immune to propaganda. I can easily imagine a scenario here where half of the country is brainwashed by propaganda and easily enticed to go to war with large sums of money just like Russian men are right now.
Russian government recruits 40,000+ men per month to go to war in Ukraine via propaganda and money and they sign contract voluntarily. That is in the country of just 120 million. USA can easily recruit 100,000+ per month.
Once on the Frontline these people will be subject to different laws so they are never coming back unless they survive until the war ends...
US's proposal on Greenland at the moment isn't too different from Russia on Ukraine, except its ends makes sense, but the means does not. There is more than one road to Rome but Trump has chosen the most barbaric one, just like Putin.
The thought that America can recruit so many people with money to go to war is very frightening. If it gets to that point, I'd like to think it would become a wake up call for many who voted for him.
Do the ends make sense?
Perhaps "makes sense" wasn't the best way to put it.
Putting aside the REE stance that AZ has talked about, Greenland's location is of vital importance to many countries. Having a presence there, especially a military presence, is vital, but do you need to own it to do that? I guess from Trump's pov, he thinks you guys in Europe haven't done much all these years and now the tide is starting to come in, I'm going to take the reins. That fits in with his bullying character.
I think he looks at it more from a legacy perspective. Get "more" - whether necessary or not.
US can have as much military as they want there already so I don't know how it makes sense other than a resource and land grab...
And then after the war ends, and they have been financed by massive debt that is unpayable, perhaps they might not be as welcome back as they once were.
Same situation as in Russia, I don't think Putin or for that matter anyone in Russia wants the soldiers to come back home...
As someone from a younger generation, I do not think the issue is a lack of courage or willingness to stand up, it is a lack of clarity. Earlier generations knew what they were defending: home, family, survival, a future that felt real. Today, the lines are blurry. Like if you ask me, I am willing to sacrifice my life, or at least I think so, for my family and beloved ones. But the actual problem lies with the system, because the cost of sacrifice often seems to protect systems that do not protect us back. Consider Trump's imperialistic approach towards Greenland, does it guarantee prosperity for the layman? I don't think so.
Many of us, the young mostly, are already fighting quiet wars: economic pressure, uncertainty, and a constant sense of instability. When life itself feels like a game for survival, the idea of giving it up for vague geopolitical goals does not sounds good.
Maybe, if a cause is real, just and shared, people will still rise. But without trust and meaning, even the bravest generation will hesitate. And, with the weapons of mass destructions, I do not think that anyone stand a chance once the World War situation arises.
Lets hope the sanity prevails!
Yes. This is the disenfranchisement. It is a type of slavery - you do what I say, and I won't pay you.
I get this mentality, but what everyone needs to understand is, life even like that is far, far better than what a real war actually is. I think a lot of young people get confused in how they define things. It is a bit like everyone who doesn't agree is a Nazi or a fascist. Be under control of real Nazis, and the reality is quite different.
I hope to win the lottery too :)
The people beating the war drums are the ones with the most to lose financially, but the least to lose physically. They want the young to protect the wealth ,they've spent eighty years accumulating, but they’ve forgotten that loyalty is a two-way street. If the society doesn't provide for the young, the young eventually stop caring if that society survives.
Children are our future... and the future is looking bleak.
My maternal great-grandfather died young in World War I. My two grandfathers served in World War II. My father was fortunate to be born in 1946 and live 80 years of peaceful life.
I think if there's a war in my country, there will be a mobilization like in Ukraine, where men under 60 are mobilized and not allowed to leave the country. Any normal person wouldn't want their children to go to war.
And would the people without children want to go to war?
If you ask them, 1% might want to.
I once read accounts of youngsters like your grandad, who concealed their real age, being just teenagers, so they could fight in the World Wars. Those were the times patriotism was actually a thing, people were willing to die to keep their country safe.
I fear that's no longer the case today, as your article rightly says. If a global conflict broke out, it would surely be fought with automated technology, maybe even AI robot soldiers. But have you stopped to imagine the kind of destruction this might cause? The world would most likely be destroyed by that kind of conflict as I'm sure nuclear weapons would come into play.
I wonder if world leaders consider these possibilities before making reskless decisions that might lead to war. I think they do, but they go ahead with the decisions anyway because if anything happens, like a nuclear way, they can be hid in bunkers and be safe there for the next several decades until everything clears. I'm sure there's everything to sustain and carry on life for decades in those bunkers. How stupid.
I think nuclear is going to come into it anyway, regardless of what we do, other than grow the hell up.
I wonder if they can truly imagine what life is like after that?
It seems to me that nowadays most people or governments try to increase their wealth rather than to protect the country. However, at one time, especially when I was young, it seemed to me that it was necessary to see a third world war. Since there have been two world wars in the past and they were long before I was born. But now I realize that war never brings anything good. Basically, its harmful effects spread to a nation, country or the world and paralyze the entire system and millions of people lose their lives and become homeless. The conscience of world leaders seems to be disappearing day by day. Because the way they oppress others for a little land or for their own existence is making this world more dangerous day by day.
I think it has been gone for a long time, it is just that they have taken more of their mask off.
Nowadays it seems that many young people are more concerned with their own benefits rather than the responsibilities they have to the community.
Maybe there is very little community left to experience anymore? I feel there is little in Finland at the ground level.
Congratulations @tarazkp! You have completed the following achievement on the Hive blockchain And have been rewarded with New badge(s)
Your next target is to reach 7500 posts.
You can view your badges on your board and compare yourself to others in the Ranking
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word
STOPI believe we should live life trying to be happy. Trying to earn money should only be a means to facilitate happiness, never the main goal.
Even though I wasn't born yet during those world wars, I felt I was there due to details written in history books. I could feel how tough times those innocent people had experienced.
Cheers.