Politics of War and Peace -  Abbott A. Brayton,  Stephana J. Landwehr

Politics of War and Peace (eBook)

A Survey of Thought
eBook Download: EPUB
2023 | 1. Auflage
317 Seiten
Bookbaby (Verlag)
978-1-6678-7428-9 (ISBN)
Systemvoraussetzungen
11,89 inkl. MwSt
  • Download sofort lieferbar
  • Zahlungsarten anzeigen
'Politics of War and Peace' contains the original writings from sixty-three of the world's most esteemed thinkers on the topics of war and peace. This book can be read as a whole text, according to topic or historical period. Discover answers to questions like: What would Plato say to big tech giants and their control of battlefield information? What would George Washington say about stretching citizens' food, clothing, and shelter to supply an army? What would Arnold Toynbee say about protecting borders and peace?
The reader is greeted with a Preface by the renowned military strategist and soldier, Andrew J. Goodpaster, followed by a Forward and Introduction. Each thinker is arranged in two tables of content, chronological and topical. Each thinker is introduced with a summary, followed by the title of their writing and then the original writing itself. The writings lift peace out of 20th and 21st centuries' chaos and rise above to places where people of all ages and walks of life can explore directions, both toward war and peace. TopicsAmong the turbulence, what would Plato say to big tech and media giants regarding their control of battlefield information as well as controlling public discourse? What would Thomas Aquinas say about qualifications of leaders empowered to declare war? What would George Washington say about stretching citizens' food, clothing, and shelter to supply an army? What would Arnold Toynbee say about protecting borders and peace? What would John F. Kennedy say to citizens living in a 21st century democratic republic? In a crisis how can citizens best express their dissatisfaction with war or leaders? History Upon exploring the origins of war-peace thought, it seems that the oldest surviving statements came from the ancient Hebrews. They often times thought war was ordained by God, but it was fought out of self interest and relationships with other tribes were contractual. Collapse of the Roman Empire in the fifth century, induced a reevaluation of human nature and conflict. The most prominent philosopher to emerge was Augustine, who explained that the Fall of Rome was due to failure to obey God's laws. A just war had to have a just purpose. Aquinas related the just war to the just ruler, looking at intentions and justice in the ruler's life. Later, Machiavelli said that men are motivated by emotion and appetite and everyone and everything moved by self -interest. Jean Bodin, in the early 1500's, advocated a standing army with a separate civilian population without arms and who therefore could not fight primarily because they were not capable. The Thirty Years War came to pass and a different aspect entered the thought of the time. Previous wars were of limited violence and at that time, there was shock and fright at the devastations which occurred. This prompted Hugo Grotius to speak against the atrocities of war, thereby considering limits on war, human rights. With the 17th and 18th Centuries, Thomas Hobbes and John Locke both saw self-interest to be the motivating factor in the lives of human beings. For Rousseau, citizens did not normally bear arms, but, in times of peace, no one held arms. When the state was threatened, the citizens automatically assumed a different role, that of a soldier, and were capable of bearing arms Napoleon postulated the existence of four separate groups within the state: the peasantry; the standing army; the nobles; and the general who directs the state because he has the power of the military and self-interest directs everyone. Jomini and Clausewitz provide commentary on Napoleon's ideas. The Twentieth Century was born with great expectations and great peril. Nations expended their wealth and resources until exhausted and could not battle any longer. So, new solutions to war and peace were sought. The aftermath of WWII brought additional shifts in thinking about war and peace. The dimensions became global and consent of many nations are involved if anyone is to survive. Survival itself becomes an organized struggle, although it may not lead to violence. Many believe there can be no just war and the affairs of humanity are in a constant state of turmoil.

I. INTRODUCTION
The organization of men to attain common goals, to include rule-making, is the purpose of politics. Derived from the Greek "polis" meaning "city" (the form of the Greek state was the city-state), "political" in the modern culture describes the principles, the beliefs, the rules established and the actions undertaken to preserve the nation—the primary goal of politics. War is the physically violent aspect of the organized struggle of one people against another to protect the state and further its interests. Since war has such drastic consequences for the physical, economic and psychological nature of the nations waging it, war may well be considered the supreme act of the state. Victorious, great power, wealth and pride ensue. Defeated, not only is its power and wealth diminished and its pride destroyed, but the nation itself often ceases to exist. War is thus the ultimate trial in international politics.
But rather than calculated and controlled by states, war often seems just to "happen." Perplexed, men have continually striven to understand war so that having accurately described it, they could either prevent war or make preparations to attain victory. Moreover, they sought in some manner to justify their own warlike behavior. Accordingly, soldiers, statesmen and scholars have respectively pondered war and have contributed to the foundation of knowledge for later generations. Each thinker described war in his own time and the collective wisdom reflects a portion of the political evolution of man. But as their experiences differed, so did their perceptions. All, however, agree that war is concerned with affairs both between men and within the internal composition of man himself.
To ancient and medieval writers justice was an act of weighing four values: the personal qualities of the individuals, community values, the law, and the situation. Peace was considered to be the individual's proper integration of appetites, emotions, and intellect throughout the process of justice; this produced a steadfastness of character. Peace within the individual was a precondition for an act of justice. This was called a state of repose : only the individual at peace with himself (one who was properly integrated) could adequately weigh and determine justice. Because that person was assessing intangibles and unknowns (perceptions of threats, community needs, capabilities, moral justifications) when he weighed the four values, an integrated and steadfast character was necessary for a just act to result, a person whose intellect ruled his appetite and emotions--hence, one at repose.
War was considered to be the antithesis of repose. Many scholars studying the concept of war as developed by earlier philosophers have viewed it as a community concept. Closer examination today, however, reveals war first as an affair within the individual, having thereafter ramifications for the community. Each classical thinker can be seen to define or call attention to war from such a framework. Accordingly, writers were concerned with describing both peace and war, as well as defining and explaining their own concepts of a just war. Hence, they explained war as an affair between men in which repose had disintegrated (although not all philosophers weighed the above-mentioned values of situation, person, community, and law). All writers consider peace to be a steadfastness or integration of the parts of the person. Any threat to peace constitutes a danger to the individual.
Individual peace is defined by some as a life directed by God. Others define individual peace as a life directed by men who interpret God's word. Others reject the concept of God and assert that society alone directs the affairs of men. Still others suggest that there is no existence other than the individual solely under the direction of himself. A few say that life has no direction whatever.
The justifications for war are equally diverse. Some assert that a country which has attained peace can defend itself or others by declaring a just war when there is an outside objective threat to that peace. Others assert that a country which has attained peace, but in which the ruler desires a reconstitution of that peace, can declare a just war by manufacturing a threat. Still others seek to establish peace within a disintegrating country by manufacturing a threat and utilizing the subsequent war to attain that goal. Finally, some justify war by suggesting that no peace is possible because the affairs of men are in a continual state of disintegration; a just war, therefore, merely attains temporary stability.
Just war, then, is generally defined by all as giving what is due to every man—a Lasswellian weighing of who gets what, when, where, how and why. While men disagree on the particulars, the general values to be weighed are repose and life or death. War, thus, is a form of justice which weighs the total community. This establishes harmony among and within communities. Hence, the ultimate goal to all men is some form of repose. Many believe that this may be attained by the proper application of political-military strategy.
Strategy, the art of utilizing power to attain goals, is employed by all nations. Men seek justification for strategies, indicating the dependence of strategy upon philosophy. This elevates the perplexities of war beyond mere military consideration and into the realm of political affairs commonly known as civil-military relations. Many issues are inherent in civil-military relations besides the basic justification for war. What should be the nature of the army? How should it be controlled? How should it interact with the nonmilitary society? What should be its effects? And how should the army be used to attain state goals? Philosophers and strategists address themselves to these questions and contribute their insights and experiences to the body of political-military thought.
The Organic-Contractual Concepts
While writers on the politics of war and peace sometimes employ both of the following philosophical concepts of human behavior, for convenience we can classify most of them in one camp or the other. These two conceptions of human behavior are the organic and the contractual. Those espousing the organic conception of civil-military relations suggest that each person has an inherent awareness of his specific and mutually supportive function within an organization. This contributes to a total relationship among members of society which develops within a continuum having neither beginning nor end. The individual, then, is an integral component of that organization and is empathetically aware of his role therein. Military service on behalf of the state (the organization) is performed by certain individuals who, though they may have the capacity to fulfill other roles in the service of the state, serve the state best in their capacity for military service. The individual is an integral part of the state, subordinating personal interests to state interests in order to achieve harmony with others. Men thus serve a greater goal, a higher ideal, in the conduct of war. In the twentieth century strong organic theories are commonly found in the totalitarian ideologies of communism and fascism. Here the individual is a subject, one subordinated to the needs of the collectivity, and one who serves at the command of those who presumably interpret the collective destiny.
Conversely, those espousing the simpler contractual conception of civil-military relations posit that individuals, either willfully or when so compelled by the use of force, initiate a social relationship (which becomes the state) in order to satisfy their personal needs. Thus, a state is formed by mutual agreement (a "social contract” such as a democratic constitution) to serve the needs of individual citizens, including survival and security. Military service on behalf of the state is performed not out of a sense of inherent obligation, but willfully or as directed on the basis of personal self-interest. Defense of the commonwealth is thus a matter of willful agreement, a citizen-army founded upon personal expedience.
The contractual and organic schools of thought respectively claim that the individual can…
1. achieve identity-potential by focusing on oneself, or
2. achieve identity-potential by "integrating oneself into one's community.
Similarly, they claim that one can defend the state and achieve identity-potential by…
1. fighting out of self-interest, or
2. seeking a military career for the good of the nation.
The distinction between the two schools of thought may be portrayed in the chart that follows.
Thus, the fundamental connection between the individual and his nation lies in the study of the politics of war and peace. Both the inherent relationship of individual to state (the organic concept) and the free association of individual with state (the contractual concept) are elements of politics. Both are used to justify political behavior. Since "democracy" means literally "people's government," the contractual concept supports a democratic government. But in a state where men sense the apparent impossibility of realizing their personal desires, the organic concept provides justification for motivating a populace for self-sacrifice to attain common goals.
The Origins of War-Peace Thought
Although early man certainly must have harbored embryonic thoughts regarding the nature of the state and the purpose of war, the oldest surviving general statements on civil-military relations were recorded by the ancient Hebrews. Despite their belief in an...

Erscheint lt. Verlag 17.1.2023
Vorwort Andrew J. Goodpaster
Sprache englisch
Themenwelt Sozialwissenschaften Politik / Verwaltung
ISBN-10 1-6678-7428-4 / 1667874284
ISBN-13 978-1-6678-7428-9 / 9781667874289
Haben Sie eine Frage zum Produkt?
EPUBEPUB (Ohne DRM)
Größe: 856 KB

Digital Rights Management: ohne DRM
Dieses eBook enthält kein DRM oder Kopier­schutz. Eine Weiter­gabe an Dritte ist jedoch rechtlich nicht zulässig, weil Sie beim Kauf nur die Rechte an der persön­lichen Nutzung erwerben.

Dateiformat: EPUB (Electronic Publication)
EPUB ist ein offener Standard für eBooks und eignet sich besonders zur Darstellung von Belle­tristik und Sach­büchern. Der Fließ­text wird dynamisch an die Display- und Schrift­größe ange­passt. Auch für mobile Lese­geräte ist EPUB daher gut geeignet.

Systemvoraussetzungen:
PC/Mac: Mit einem PC oder Mac können Sie dieses eBook lesen. Sie benötigen dafür die kostenlose Software Adobe Digital Editions.
eReader: Dieses eBook kann mit (fast) allen eBook-Readern gelesen werden. Mit dem amazon-Kindle ist es aber nicht kompatibel.
Smartphone/Tablet: Egal ob Apple oder Android, dieses eBook können Sie lesen. Sie benötigen dafür eine kostenlose App.
Geräteliste und zusätzliche Hinweise

Buying eBooks from abroad
For tax law reasons we can sell eBooks just within Germany and Switzerland. Regrettably we cannot fulfill eBook-orders from other countries.

Mehr entdecken
aus dem Bereich
Mein Leben in der Politik

von Wolfgang Schäuble

eBook Download (2024)
Klett-Cotta (Verlag)
29,99
Mit „Green Growth“ gegen den Klimawandel und für die …

von Hans-Jörg Naumer

eBook Download (2023)
Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden (Verlag)
9,99