The Disregard Of Human Life

In his writing, he stated that war is intrinsically vast, communal (or political) and violent. It is an actual, widespread and deliberate armed conflict between political communities, motivated by a sharp disagreement over governance” (p.135)

In regards to war, Gandhi once commented, “I object to violence because when it appears to do good, the good is only temporary, the evil it does is permanent.” In other words, violence masks its potential impairment by seeming innocuous at first; however, the true damage, often permanent, can be seen chronically. The idea reflected by Gandhi’s quote can be proven through an examination of World War I and Erich Maria Remarque’s All Quiet on the Western Front. Although soldiers and governments in both worlds initially saw honor and security of their countries as valid reasons for going to war, what ultimately came of that conflict were both immediate consequences, such as loss of innocence and development of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (often referred to as PTSD) among young soldiers, as well as permanent, long-term consequences, like the hatred the war had spurred in Germans which ultimately ensued to Hitler’s rise to power.

This specific quote and the tone it provides upholds that negative impacts that war has on

Dehumanization is a big part of World war II, it is the reason why World War II is the deadliest war in human history, it is also the reason why the soldiers were willing to point their gun at another human being and to end “its” life without a blink. Not only was dehumanizing a big part of this, racism also played a big role as well. Racism is very powerful; it enlarges the hate towards the differences and made people treat their enemies as subhuman. Just as John Dower had mentioned in his book War Without Mercy, “Race hate fed atrocities, and atrocities in turn fanned the fires of the race hate. The dehumanization of the Other contributed immeasurably to the psychological distancing that facilitates killing, not only on the battlefield but also in the plans adopted by strategists far removed from the actual scene of combat” (11).

For example, in an account of conditions during this time period, Kathleen Brockington, an innocent English civilian, writes, “I can remember my mother-in-law bursting into tears and putting her gas mask on that first day; In 1940 the air raids started up proper” (Document A). The citizens of England were being exposed to war weaponry, and being put into danger by air raids perpetrated by other countries opposing their own. This is a strong example of how during this war, ordinary people, rather than solely the soldiers who were meant to fight for said ordinary people, were targeted as a wartime practice. Yet the most prominent example of human targets during a war is that of the Nazis targeting a vast multitude of minority groups, which, of course, also occurred during World War Two.

Oriana Fallaci, an Italian Journalist, once said, “ Alas, nothing reveals man the way war does. Nothing so accentuates in him the beauty and ugliness, the intelligence and foolishness, the brutishness and humanity, the courage and cowardice, the enigma.” Fallaci is trying to convey the message that wartime only reveals and highlights the true nature of man. War does not change humanity, it only exposes it’s true nature. This concept is especially apparent in World War II in which extreme acts of good and evil were committed._____ Through analysis of World War II, it can be seen that war does not shape humanity but exposes and emphasizes characteristics based on an individuals’ moral code.

“As defined in article 2 of the Convention of the Prevention of the Crime of Genocide, genocide is any act with intent to liquidate a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group” (“Office of the UN...”1) . Genocide has been an issue around the world for several centuries, and sadly it continues to this day. There is one specific genocide that many historians study, the forced evacuation of the Chechens. Although this may be classified as a relocation, it was declared an act of genocide by the European Parliament in 2004 (Brauer and “Office of the UN…”).

Tom Zoellner, writes in his bibliography “An Ordinary Man” about the period of the Rwandan Genocide. Its impact and repercussions on the people, and how one hospitality-employed leadership figure by the name of Paul Rusesabagina saved 1,268 Tutsis through goodwill and courageous negotiations, are chronically ordered and told in detail. Ominously, the author introduces you into a standard of life that to us seems inexistent.

After viewing the documentary film ‘The War You Don’t See’ by John Pilger, my previous feelings towards the war and the way people are treated grew more immense as I felt more informed as to what was going on behind closed doors. I have always found the thought of war pointless, destructive and inhumane, this documentary supports my previous attitudes. The way certain media associations manipulate and hide the truth is a scary thought, this film shows how the media lacks honesty on a destructive level. How can one take a position and make an informed decision towards what they should do or how they should react towards these global issues? They can’t, it is impossible to make an informed decision when one is not told the whole truth. ‘The War You Don’t See’ also informs the viewers to see how poorly the innocent civilians are treated and in many cases how their lack of rights results in cruel deaths. Pilger presents these issues to the viewers of this film in a way which looks down upon the people of the military and media and sympathise toward those innocent civilians of these war stricken countries, which I personally strongly support and am left feeling pleased with Pilger’s work.

One of the paramount effects of war on young people is the dehumanization of humanity. Dehumanization is the psychological occurrence of demonizing the enemy or one’ self, manufacture them to appear less than human and therefore not worthy of humane behaviour (Maiese, 2003). Maiese (2003) adds that it can lead to amplified viciousness, human rights violations, war corruptions, and genocide. In All Quiet on the Western Front (1994), soldiers rarely saw the

Genocide was not new in WWII, nor was it an isolated incident, but the ease with which the Nazi’s were able to significantly reduce the Jewish population was only the beginning of a new era in warfare. Personal responsibility would take a back seat to nationality, patriotism, and advancing technology.

The crime of genocide is one of the most devastating human tragedies throughout the history. And the word genocide refers to an organised destruction to a specific group of people who belongs to the same culture, ethnic, racial, religious, or national group often in a war situation. Similar to mass killing, where anyone who is related to the particular group regardless their age, gender and ethnic background becomes the killing targets, genocide involves in more depth towards destroying people’s identity and it usually consists a fine thorough plan prearranged in order to demolish the unwanted group due to political reasons mostly. While the term genocide had only been created recently in 1943 by Raphael Lemkin, a Polish-Jewish legal

The conflict between the Allies and the Axis was a horrific and deadly one, which consisted of genocide and mass bombings. Innocent citizens were killed with the estimated sixty million casualties, which lead to the question as to the morality of the different actors—Germany, Japan, England and America— in WWII. In order to truly assess their guilt, meaning their moral innocence, each country will be measured upon the morality of their intent and execution of the different controversial mass killings that Germany (the Holocaust), Japan (Nanking), and the Allied forces (Dresden and Hiroshima) took part in. This hierarchy of evil can be judged upon how Japan’s tyranny and the Allies’ area bombing compare to the genocide performed by Germany. Similarly, these countries will be judged on the whether these different acts were premeditated versus in response to another act, as well as the proportionality to which these acts were carried out. This measurement of evil places each party on an overall scale, which depicts the total guilt that each country or countries deserve. WWII exemplifies that while war is an unavoidable aspect of human nature, there is no such thing as a just war. Similarly, while there is a definite hierarchy of morality between the different actors of WWII, each of the countries at play are immoral in their intent and execution of the attacks on opposing countries.

More than half a century has passed since the end of World War Two and to this day it is still difficult to fully understand the severity of what was by far the most destructive war in human history. More than sixty million people were killed during World War Two and more than half of those were innocent town’s people. Among the dead were over six million Jews, which was two thirds of the total living race in Europe at the time. Beyond these general statistics were thousands of stories of crimes committed against soldiers and civilians. These crimes against humanity included cases of prisoners of war being murdered, sent to concentration camps and abuse as well as harmless civilians being rounded up and

Wars and conflicts have been happening around the world since the dawn of human kind. Wars happen due to the nature of political societies and human kind’s willingness to kill. Without the will to kill, there would be no war. In this essay I will be looking into the wars and conflicts that occurred in the 20th century and why it was an event or a series of events that occurred in the first place. The 20th century saw mass killings, genocide and extreme violence, not only in the European countries (in reference to Nazi Germany) but all throughout the world as well. This essay focuses on why there was so much bloodshed in the 20th century and the purpose of these events occurred the way it did and whether it was necessary, justified or could have been prevented.