4 ms·
I think it has been an established fact that the only way to convince people to go to war has been through catastrophic Pearl Harbor type events, massive propag
by orbifold 12y ago
I think it has been an established fact that the only way to convince people to go to war has been through catastrophic Pearl Harbor type events, massive propaganda and lies. It also helps to have a professional army and no draft, so that only certain sections of the population are really affected.
The types of wars and foreign policy decisions the US has been engaged in are more or less inconceivable with an informed and educated electorate that could vote on them.
- gadders 12y agoSo you think that the US wouldn't have entered WWII if the US electorate had been more informed?
- orbifold 12y agoI believe that if people are not influenced by war propaganda they generally favor peaceful resolutions of conflict. This is definitely true for the recent Iraq and Afghanistan wars, but probably also true of Vietnam, US support for Saddam Hussein, the Khmer Rouge against Vietnam and so on. If I'm not mistaken public opinion in the US did not support a declaration of war against Germany before Pearl Harbor, obviously in the case of WWII the US really wasn't left with a choice after declarations of war by both Germany and Japan.
- notahacker 12y agoAn informed and educated public's decision to vote is also skewed by how much they care about the issue, which gives certain factions a big say in running it. Cuban Americans[1] and fanatical anticommunists care a lot more about not normalising diplomatic relations with Cuba than the general public cares about export contracts, holiday destinations and Cuban human rights not being any worse than many other countries the US has diplomatic relations with. Public sentiments are often swayed in favour of war, and have far less reason to take into account its consequences, because the public isn't punished at the ballot box if "our patriotic duty" turns out to be a farcical mistake. And when it comes to influential minorities, can we even rely on the 59% of Argentines (Yougov survey, 2012) that think military action over "las Malvinas" would be inappropriate to keep the ultra-patriotic 26% that would favour a hypothetical military solution in check? Especially with a substantial majority of that anti-war grouping believing those islands rightfully belong to Argentina anyway. The 1982 war, after all, was a desperately unpopular dictatorship's attempt to appeal to public sentiment. [1]though due to the quirk of Florida being an essential swing state in the electoral college system they've had a disproportional influence in policy under the existing system anyway...