Entry details

Younghusband
Author

Younghusband

Date

July 29th, 2006

Tags

Comments

7 Comments so far.
Add yours.

The Decadent Society

Ran into an interesting quote today, from Sir Halford J. Mackinder:

Democracy refuses to think strategically unless and until compelled to do so for the purposes of defense.

This made me think of Rome, and how we also became an entertainment society. In Canada at least, I think some strategists have stood up, but still too many of our population are solely focused on Canadian Idol or Hockey Night in Canada. I guess it all comes back to how populations perceive war, peace and the in between.

Agree? Disagree? Thoughts?

Comments to this entry

Catholicgauze
July 29, 2006
9:04 pm
Agreed. A strength of democratic societies is its freedoms. The greatest weakness of democratic societies is those who enjoy the freedoms but work against the country.
snow
July 30, 2006
3:22 pm
I don't think it's really such a problem that the general populace are mostly interested in Canadian Idol and Hockey Night in Canada. Just as long as enough people support a strong military and realize the importance of security in a nasty world. And just as long as the peace, love and brotherhood types don't lead the country to disarmament on the road to utopia.
moorethanthis
July 30, 2006
7:38 pm
Democracy is an all-or-nothing proposition. You guys may grumble about it leading to 'decadence', but there's a reason that those sentiments aren't currently being broadcasted thoughout the Nazi empire by its propaganda services. Generally, citizens of a democracy will pull together against an outside enemy, when it poses a real existential threat to that society. But this is more from a sense of needing to defend themselves than giving up liberties because the government tells them to (a feature of the U.S. and Britain's war on terror).

By contrast, in dictatorships the 'outside threat' is always there. The regime in Singapore does not exist to implent the policy of total defence - total defence exists to perpetuate the Singaporean regime.
Demetrius
July 31, 2006
1:13 pm
This is just another application of the maxim "war teaches geography". The fact of the matter is, that most people just don't care enough about the rest of the world to know all that much about it; preconceptions and prejudice are easier. People like the historical Francis Younghusband or Sir Richard Burton are rare enough, even in a time of general worldwide order like the Victorian era, never mind in this day, when the perils of overseas travel are emphasised and exaggerated by a mercenary media.

This applies even more to countries like the US or Canada, the majority of whose immigrants come to get away from pernicious conflicts in their home countries. Mix this with news coverage of those who bring their feuds with them: the Air India bombing, Tamil Tiger funding, the Khadr family connections, Greeks and Macedonians demonstrating (and occasionally scuffling) against each other. This just increases the aversion in North Americans against even knowing more about such confusing and unsavoury affairs.
Younghusband
July 31, 2006
2:35 pm
bq. in dictatorships the "Ëœoutside threat' is always there

I think it is completely viable to say that the threat is "always there" regardless of political system. The international arena is in a constant state of competition... If you think of war as competition, War and Peace cannot be considered binary, there are just degrees of being at war.

bq. This applies even more to countries like the US or Canada, the majority of whose immigrants come to get away from pernicious conflicts in their home countries.

Very good point about the underlying cultural aspects of immigration, Demetrius.
moorethanthis
July 31, 2006
4:23 pm
I meant that dictatorships will always exaggerate a threat to the nation in order to justify/perpetuate their regimes.
Kenneth
August 1, 2006
6:05 pm
True enough. Democracy, with its inherent myopia, is ill-equipped to think strategically unless under great strain.