6

One might cite as not inherently violent the Faisceau in inter-war (1918-39) France. Les Faisceau The following extract will take us into the subject: Fascism, violence and storm troopers: in the popular mind the three are inseparable. The same could be said, on a more sophisticated plane, of the scholarly discourse on fascism. In an area in ...


5

The most famous philosophical work on military matters is Sun Tzu's The Art of War. Although thousands of years old, it outlines general principles still applicable today, and although largely about tactics, it also is centrally concerned with "running a military force in the abstract."


3

Domestically, fascism is inherently oppressive — it always seeks to cement differential rights and liberties for its core group, over, above, and at the expense of the rights and liberties of other groups — but while oppression always relies on force of one sort or another, it does not necessarily involve outright violence. In practice, fascists have ...


3

First, let's look at the phrase itself. The phrase, "The War on Terror" is a rhetorical construction that follows a long tradition in America: The War on Poverty The War on Drugs The War on Cancer During World War II, all of American society was mobilized toward one particular goal. Bureaucrats saw this and asked themselves if we could use the same efforts ...


2

Read slowly. While understanding texts like this will become easier with practice, the is no recipe to »easily understand works […] complicated in language,« no more than there is a simple recipe to easily understand, say, mathematical proofs. So instead of a recipe, let me give you some guidelines: Details While the text might seem somwhat poetical, that ...


2

If standing up a military is ethical in the first place, then as long as the recruiter provides correct and complete information to/from the applicant and does not apply any coercive threats/rewards to the potential recruit, everything is on the up and up (irrespective of whether the recruiter would be able to serve). The other items point out conditions ...


2

Gabor Mate, doctor, author, and addiction specialist, argues that we have a hierarchy which puts traumatised people at the top, who see the world as intrinsically violent and dangerous. Kate Pickett & Richard Wilkinson, economists and authors of The Inner Level, correlate all kinds of social harms including increased need for police, security guards, ...


2

Its principle is the unity of the people as signified by its symbol, the fasces, the strength in unity as with the opening sequence of Ran where arrows placed together are shown to be more difficult to split. Liberalism has the opposite principle, strength by scattered individuality. And protection of the minorities, in the extreme case minorities of one ...


2

'With' or 'By' 'By other means' makes for more colloquial English, whatever the German original. Part of the art of translation is to avoid literalness in the interests of conveying in one language ideas and arguments expressed in another. We say 'By what means will you achieve this?', 'I will have to pursue my objective by other means'. Such sentences are ...


1

For a proper understanding of this quote, you have to realise what the end of war is for Clausewitz. The end of war is to subdue the enemy under the will of a political body; a will which is defined and constituted by the politics of that political body. Having understood this, it is easy to see why war is on par with other political means which exist to ...


1

I agree with PeterJ, who wrote, "What you describe is all so obvious it doesn't seem worth writing about." But if you're searching for a few significant names who have waded in on this issue, the first name that popped into my mind is Che Guevara. He certainly understood the U.S. for what it is, and you could find some interesting quotes in his classic ...


1

No. But arguably, what is needed for the evolution of societies is attaining knowledge. To stay with your example, even if Darwin, Einstein, Bohr, or Hubble had not lived, others would have discovered what they did, simply because their discoveries were made standing on the shoulders of the previous generations of scientists. It would perhaps have taken a ...


1

There are two major flaws with this premise: 1 - There's evidence that philosophy has not been as historically male as is often assumed. The contributions of women philosophers are not greatly celebrated in the historical record, but there are other likely reasons for that than that they did not exist. 2 - Among the philosophers commonly recognized as "...


1

We already have such a rule. The Hague Convention, Article 1 states "the Contracting Powers agree to use their best efforts to ensure the pacific settlement of international differences." Therefore if either side thought it were possible to resolve the dispute by an MMA match, or any other less violent means than war, they are already bound by ...


1

What your extremely interesting considerations show is that total war is never a rational choice. It is never an optimific choice. Or rather that it has never been an optimific choice in the past. 'Past performance is no guarantee of future results' - investment bankers are right at least about that. There's always the possibility that next time it will pay ...


1

Much of your argument stems from the assumption that a choice between death and something else is not a choice. There are countless examples in history which suggest this is not a good assumption to hold while delving into difficult concepts like total warfare. There are plenty of examples of people who have chosen to die for their religion when faced with ...


1

Like many of your questions, there is a philosophical "groundlessness" that can easily make people "peevish," to use your own words. And a scent of "holier than thou" attempting the pry out "hypocrisy." First, is war ever ethically justified? You cannot even ask your questions without answering this one. The ethical justifications of war are a complex and ...


1

For the psychological/philosophical side of military thought, D. Grossman's book On Killing could be relevant - while it covers a rather narrower topic compared to the whole military life as such, it is probably the main distinction between the mentality of military and other high risk occupations and organizations.


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible