If you do read Ruddy on Teddy (see what I did there), you may also see him a bit more clearly than he is so often portrayed as a sort of mustachioed “teddy bear” (I did it again, sorry) who jovially goes about the world with his big stick (and big gun killing big evil-but defenseless-creatures as “sport” for his very needy ego).

As his full quote indicates, his “progressive” world view drips with an arrogant elitism that is then manifested in racism among other things that we see repeated in grotesque fashion thereafter. This includes such “progressive” things as eugenics, the elevation of propaganda literally to an art form and various and sundry other wonderful innovations that contributed to a world war, a cold war, a war on poverty and other wonders. All of these have a common thread of consolidating political and economic power in the hands of various elites (either through force or more benignly through encouraging increasing reliance on our elite masters for our every need) at the expense of personal freedom and self-respect. But we should not complain as it is all for our “greater good.”

The entire quote is:

“The most righteous of all wars is a war with savages, though it is apt to be also the most terrible and inhuman. It is primeval warfare, and it is waged as war was waged in the ages of bronze and iron. All the merciful humanity that even war has gained during the last two thousand years is lost. A sad and evil feature of such warfare is that the whites, the representatives of civilization, speedily sink almost to the level of their barbarous foes, in point of hideous brutality. Odd things happen in a battle, and the human heart has strange and gruesome depths and the human brain still stranger shallows. “

Your reference to TR caused me to recall the earlier aside in this thread about the validity of the observation in spite of the questionable bona fides of SLA Marshall. I guess TR may have stated a “truth” (almost common sensical to me), but given his (IMHO) poseur status in terms of anything to do with real military knowledge and experience (notwithstanding his “Rough Rider” persona) I think the same skepticism suggested for SLAM would apply here as well .

It’s perhaps less the ingrained norms of, say, what it means to be a good family man and patriot, or even ideological fanatic, that I’m suggesting shapes responses to terror and fear, and more what cues we can read from the reaction of others. Are they getting on with it, even appearing nonchalant, or running hellbent to the hills?

Paul

Rationalism and emotions don’t mix? Come again? Take a look at Mercer (in IO, 2010) on emotional beliefs for a summary of the neuroscience and some thoughts on how that relates to social science, and war. On rationalism and emotion, try Damasio, Descarte’s Error. Or William James from back in the day. Emotions are part of rationality, not an aberration from it, or a layer on top of it. Like I said, arid and flawed ‘rational’ actor models are, thankfully, on their way out.

As for the science of psychology versus the ‘science’ of war – they’re not mutually exclusive. Consider Clausewitz on the passions of the people, or Thucydides on fear, honour and interest. What could be more psychological than the fear, anger, exhaustion and stress of war, or the exhiliration, vengeance, lust and love in it for that matter? Why wouldn’t those things affect the behaviour of individuals and groups?

On the small group and combat motivation, I would venture that similar psychological processes are at work in combat as in every other type of human activity – i.e. a combination of social and cognitive psychology. As for the balance, it’s certainly open to debate – and debate there is. But measuring it by whether or not people mention their comrades, or even like them, is flawed methodology. People don’t like to think they behave the way they do because of group norms – it’s bad for your self-esteem to think you’re a sheep, but there’s a wealth of evidence that we are.

Coming from the man who lent me his copy of Purify and Destroy, I’m a bit surprised! Still, you can definitely critique my paper before I send it in…