7 ms·
> It looks like the closer you are to a thread, the most willing are you to fight. I don't think its that simple. The question is "willing to fight a war". Ger
by dom0 9y ago
> It looks like the closer you are to a thread, the most willing are you to fight.
I don't think its that simple. The question is "willing to fight a war". German people have learned that when Germany goes to war it is usually not for the best of the country. On the other hand, Germany had "the threat" next door for 40+ years and the willingness to defend was very high. So I think when you ask Germans this question, they will consider the question as if it were "Are you willing to fight an attack war?", not "... to defend your country".
Finland is probably exactly the other way around.
It should also be considered that central Europe has been a very stable place for some time, so somewhat similar reasons will probably apply to other countries as well; wars are not fought in the home countries of central Europeans any more; wars are in the east or south, so when a European country today starts a war, it's difficult to not consider it an attack war along at least one dimension.
Needless to say, "the aggressor in an attack war is practically always the bad guy" has pretty much become kind of a European core tenet.
- kochthesecond 9y agoI also think they interpret it this way in Finland (can anyone more familiar comment?). Finland has conscription service in their armed forces, where they focus on a defensive war to protect their country. This might pull them towards the defensive interpretation of 'willing to fight a war'.
- toxik 9y agoRight, these percentages show essentially the marginalized likelihood of the question's interpretation and its response. That is to say, it is the weighted sum of the probability of wanting to fight an aggressive/defensive war, weighted by the probability of that interpretation. What I found interesting is that Sweden, which has had peace for over 200 years, has a really high percentage.