"If wars are so bad, why do we keep fighting? Drawing on philosophy, psychology, history, and literature to explain how political leaders exploit old resentments and injuries to fuel new conflicts, this book argues that feelings of political humiliation and promises of glory are central in the drive to war"--
If wars are so bad, why do we keep fighting? Drawing on philosophy, psychology, history, and literature to explain how political leaders exploit old resentments and injuries to fuel new conflicts, this book argues that feelings of political humiliation and promises of glory are central in the drive to war.
From Hitler's determination to erase Germany's disgrace after World War I, to Sadat's promise to undo Egypt's humiliation in 1967, to ISIS's proclamations that it would end the emasculation of Muslims and restore the glory of the Caliphate, a sense of political humiliation and a desire for martial glory have always been central in the drive to war. Yet although glory and humiliation are the twin engines of conflict, and together they spur individuals and nations to violence, philosophers have shown little interest in these dispositions. In this book Nir Eisikovits offers a philosophical account of political humiliation, martial glory, and the relationship between them. Drawing on philosophy, literature, and psychology, Eisikovits argues that it is impossible to understand why people are drawn to war and how wars are justified without making sense of these two political passions and the ways in which they inflame each other.
