In a war, civilized people kill human beings. How can a civilized person do this? Why do they do this? How does it affect them? Do civilized people become uncivilized during war?
Remember, this blog is used as a discussion tool. Please answer questions, come up with your own, and comment on other comments.
Posts
28 comments:
I think to answer this question, we must establish what it means to be civilized. Does it mean we are in control of our subconscious? Does it mean we are living in a city with other people? Does it mean we are....the definitions range. A dictionary however can define it simply as " to a stage of social, cultural, and moral development considered to be more advanced" so the term is completely relative.Romans were believed civilized for their time, cave men were civilized for their time. So how can "civilized" people kill? War does something to people. To a person who fought to defend their home for example, they are thinking of their loved ones and classifying people they kill as protective measures. When a person is in war, they hear guns they hear cries, they see things nobody should see. That changes people. Then again, killing is nowhere defined as being uncivilized, illegal yes, but was OJ Simpson uncivilized? A civilized person kills when they must, if they deduct the kill will save and protect them, their company, or there loved ones. The propaganda, as we studied, was very influential, some people had never left their home, and so to them, the world outside was what people told them it was. They were trained to believe the enemy is bringing death onto themselves.
"When do civilized people kill?"when they must, if they must, when killing saves their lives. Civilization nowadays is very tough, and it always has been, it may not be there but survival of the fittest applies, today:your "fitness" is the way you deal with the credit crisis" centuries ago your "fitness" was it you could kill enough for food. In war you have to kill not to be killed.
The real question truly is then that: "Why do civilized people declare war?" A soldier in the field does what he or she must, to stay alive or to save others that are close to them.
Now onto my questions:
What is your definition of civilized?
What is a civilized person nowaday?
I dont know if any of that makes sense. :)
For my definition of civilized, it would be "survival of the fittest. To maintain balance in physical, emotional and mental control." TO answer the "Why do civilized people declare war?" Well if you were in the shoes of a "civilized person," I would say that we are trying to maintain balance in the countries that we fight with, or get even.
For the second question, I think that civilized people are very complex and sophisticated. They mean business instead of taking life as a joke. But there is nothing wrong with having a little fun once in awhile, but that's a different story. Civilized people want to find ways to improve things and create more "advanced" technology.
For my question: If you were in the shoes of a soldier who was "civilized" and you were called to war, and you knew that you would probably kill someone, how could you explain what it would mean to be civilized even if it means killing someone?
I think that, in simpler terms than Omar, they don't consider eachother as people. Their mind passes this horror, tricking them into believing that it is Germany that they are killing of Britain that they are killing, not souls.
War, nowadays, is part of civilization. Even if you are civilized, you still can fight in wars. But wars definitely change people. I wouldn't necessarily say it makes people less civilized, but it definitely changes them.
I do argue with my previous statement, that you can be uncivilized during a war. Killing someone just because they aren't from your country's group of allies is, in my opinion, uncivilized. That German guy you just had the nerve to kill could have been your best friend. The question asked was how can people kill in wars?
In wars, people see, like Omar said, unimaginable and unreal sights. In my opinion, the soldiers don't know anything different from killing in wars. It is what they were taught to do in training, and it is what every soldier before them did. Also, maybe it is a case of peer pressure... The soldiers see other soldiers killing with no mercy, so they are persuaded into believing that they must do the same.
There are many affects to war and killing. The most common one is PTSD. When you are out of the war, you feel as though you are still in it.
To answer Omar's questions, civilization is very subjective... there are many different ways of living... but in my opinion being civilized means being in the know, and living the most complex and , well civilized lifestyle.
Why do people go to war even when they have heard the destruction and horrors of it? This is a topic, I personally don't understand. Is it like drugs... you know that it's bad but you still go for it? What do you think??
First of all, I think its great we're hving again a blog discussion, I really enjoy them.
Second this is a very deep question and has been going on through the centuries, I'd like to see the class' opinion.
Going back to Jared Diamond's article (thanks ms olson, its been so useful these months), some cultures are more advanced than others, and no matter how civilised or wealthy they are THEY WILL KILL. Either to conquer or any other reason, the fate of soldiers is many times foreseen: death. Yes, they kill, but why is the question.
In my opinion it all goes to a matter of HONOR. Sometimes honor is patriotism and is good, but to a point, honor kills. A soldier in WWI felt honor in their country and was ready to die for it, pure nationalism. This takes you to the point of HETERED of other nations.
On the other hand killing is in the human nature. OK, this is debatable, but the instinct made the early humans kill for food. Now we dont need to kill for food, but its still in our incstincts. Hitler killed millions and millions, and in my opinion, he had this incstinct waaay too developed.
Hitler killed millions, yes, but his society was very civilized. Racist, homophobic, killing, yes. But ''civilized''. In fact they followed greek ideals of beauty and society. Following WWII, there was holocaust and the Hiroshima bombings from US. Is that civilized?
Sometimes there is killing for vengeance, pure vengeance being resentful dor something in the past like what happend in WWI. But, of course, vengeance is part of the human feelings and actions. Lying, taking vengeance, GREED: they all take to killing, for civilized as you are.
For the definition of civilized, I so agree with OMAR and SENJA.Nazis were'nt civilized, as 'neat' as they looked or how they acted in the daily basis.
In one thing, I have a different opinion than SENJA. I do not think civilized = survival of the fittest. I think this is a incstinct-like issue. We should be away from that now. Come on! We are in the XXI century and I think the few that act all 'survival of the fittest' are the real ones who killed, not the civilized ones.
I agree with Rachel, the non civilized will kill their equal and dont mind. At all. Because, as RACHEL says, they are souls. Each person has a world in them. A world. Why to kill them then?
To comment on JULIA's question, I'd say yes. It could be compared to drugs. But people are blinded by the feelings that I expressed above. The HONOR. That would blind many and would enlist. Because: what better way to die than for your country?
Anyways, I do not agree with killing people, civilized or not, by citizens or wild people.
I think this is an extremely interesting topic, I'd like to hear from everyone.
Johanna B
I agree with Rodrigo, civilized or not, people will kill. That happened in the First World War and even today, civilized or not, people will still kill others, either for protection or save others. I think it doesnt depend on how civilized you are or if you are not. Historically from the world war I, I think it was a matter of duty or inexperienced. Many soldiers were called for duty and before the war many they didnt know what was expected in the future. Others had never left their homes and didnt know what was out there. During the war many were taught that killing their enemies, civilized or not, that was the purpose for you nation to do so.
Although some soldiers knew that they killed other innocent soldiers, some whom may did not ask to be part of the war and kill others, they were forced to. It was their duty and protection for themselves and their country. Some soldiers had different prospectives but I beleive at that time, it was an honor to kill others even though you were civilized. But I think if you are civilied or not, it doesnt make any difference, whther you kill someone or not, you don't have to be civilized.
To the many soldiers in the world war I I think it affected them in some ways. I mean, pride of killing others and maybe defeating otheres, it was a pride for its country. That is looking upon yourself as a proud soldier. But behind the mask of a solider, before entering the war you might have been a sympathetic farmer. Killing loads of people makes a difference if you think about it. I thnk like other soldiers of your enemy are quite similar in some ways. Killing because they were called for duty and show pride in themselves they may think for a while but after realizing behind that soldier helmet there might have been another person, not your enemy. In other ways it probably affected the people because of the memories of killing others. Memories of death and killing people and having the guilt hanging over you affected people.
I think to answer the last question if civilized people become uncivilzed is true. When soldiers fought, experienced death everyday, and lived in a "warlife" I would guess it was very different from their life before. During and after the war I think lots of people become uncivilized because they are not used to after the wars and battles how to act in normal society, i think they are deeply affected that contributes to how civilized you are or not.
So to kill is civilized? Why is against the law then? Why does our society dictate when it's okay to and who to kill? What's murder and what's honor?
Yonas M
I think being civilized means being culturally advanced (from dictionary). I think civilians kill people propoganda influences them. A civilized person kills when they have to, like to defend their country. Like I said before, propoganda changed civilized eople into thinkning that they should kill. To answer Ms. Olson's question, murder is an UNCIVILIZED way of killing people because you are not getting anything good from it. To kill with honor is when you kill to defend someone or something or to kill someone with honor would be if you killed your opposition in a war. Propoganda plays a very important part in this discussion because like I said before, they influenced other people to go to war. If you wanted to go to war just to have fun killing people, then that is very uncivilized because you have no positive reason to go to war.
I think I have to agree with Johanna's lovely opinion when she said "people become uncivilized because they are not used to after the wars and battles how to act in normal society, i think they are deeply affected that contributes to how civilized you are or not". I think she's right because people who I've mentioned beofore (soldiers who have no reason to go to war) will have problems after the war because they will have enemies and things, they won't cope in a normal society.
To answer Omar's amazing question, I think people nowadays think that a civilized person is a person who has respect and is, as what Rodrigo said, "neat". To be honest, this is what I think of a civilized person-----> neat, respectful, kind, etc. (all the positive things). To me, uncivilized would be disrespectful, dirty, inhumane, etc. (all the negative things).
I think Julia's question is misleading (no offense), but I don't think many people realize how destructive and horrific the war is. Ms. Olson said that people don't exaggerate a lot in the propoganda posters because then people will feel scared and not go to the war. Propagandas are meant to show how horrid and insane their oppostions are.
"Why do some people feel enthusiastic about going to war?"
To anwer Yonas' question I think some people feel entusiastic about going to war because of what they are told=propaganda. Just like what Ms Olson said, in propaganda they showed clean, happy, strong, healthy men. The posters never showed the effects of gas bombs, or guns. People were also told that the enemy was monstrous, inhumane, heartless, and an abomination. This ignited a sort of passion in some people. The false assurance that they would be ok only continued to fuel a false sense of pride and honor in war. If you look at many soldiers nowadays they have to go to war n iraq and know full well the horrors and dangers that occur over there. However, centuries ago in the times of the Romans. War was also seen as a reason for pride. They had absolutely no connection or pictures and the people knew only the honor they would receive, according to the government's propaganda speeches. So, the overall answer is, no sane person is happy to go to war when they know the consequences. So, people were happy and energetic because they thought honor would come of it.
To answer ms olson's last question:
What is honor and what is murder? Just like the relative way of judging civilization: honor is relative to each person. For a suicide bomber: the greatest honor s to die for god. For Spartans: the greatest honor is to die in war. Nowadays there is no defined version of honor. It varies everywhere and with every person. In the time of WW1 people believed that, because of the strong feelings of nationalism, they would die sometime so why not die for their country, defeating their monstrous enemies.
Omar
I agree with everyone. I think this a great question.
Why do civilized people kill? I think civilized is kinda like us.. You eat animals and plants not people, you live humanly, and you dont go around killing people. So in a way people kill because the either have to or want to. I think the people in the war had to. But people like us shouldn't have to kill. i beleive that killing other human beings is wrong, nothing is solved with violence. But when at war you are obliged to.
i think like Omar the people arent all there when at war, they propably have seen bad things and experienced horrible things. So they change and i think after they kill oone person they just keep ding it. Many nations called people savages for killing and then they went out and killed thousands in the Great War. So are they all considered savages now.
I think civilized people kill but after a point of killing you become not so civilized. You change.
To answer ms. Olson
What is Honor? what is Murder?
Honor: i think honor is dieing for something you believe in. For example: 12/18 the men who flew the plane into the towers died for there god. They died because they thought they would be respected, honored, loved and heroes. But yet they killed a lot of people.
Murder: Murdering some one is killing them because you want to. Some kill people they haven't even met. Maybe they have a dieing urge to kill. Most likely they had some mental damage or something happened to them to make them killers. But murdering is killing for the sake of you, not others. You don't do it for others to be respected but to be happy with yourself.
Ms Olson asked:
In a war, civilized people kill human beings.How can a civilized person do this? Why do they do this? How does it affect them? Do civilized people become uncivilized during war?
I think people are forgetting a part of the discussion. But of course one thing leads to another because: how to discuss about how civilized people kill if we have different opinions on civilized societies?
How would YOU (a civilized person) be affected after killing someone? There is the PTSD and other traumas and the GUILT of having killed someone. Lets put Hitler as an example (again): he did kill millions, but did his daily life change, or the people he was around? I dont think so. But what does ms olson mean?
Killing directly or indirectly?
As we are studying WWI I will assume the debate involves dirct killing like shooting someone or stabbing someone. That would be a direct form. Throwing a bomb having no clue if it killed someone or who it killed is the indirect form.
I want to do a review with what I think and MY opinions about the questions:
1.)How can a civilized person do kill? As I explained before, I think it is because of the feelings: REVENGE, GREED, HATERED, HONOR. Because as good as they seem these feelings take you to killing someone. Even if you're civilized, your inside feelings take you to opposites of your normal behaviour.
2.)Why do they do this? It basically is the same as before, the feelings. They can eat you up. Everyone who has killed (intentionally) had reasons to.
3.) How does it affect them? Just as before, there are several outcomes: PTSD, different traumas, etc. But guilt is the worse.
4.)Do civilized people become uncivilized during war? There have been many times when people become uncivilized for different factors. Living alone for a long time or living with 'uncivilized' people for a long time are two. Becoming uncivilized during war is a total different one, but yes it is possible. Having to cope with the guilt can be you coo-koo (do you spell it like that?).
There shouldnt be any killing, so dont let the reasons get you.
Stephan H.
Like Omar said, what is the definition of civilized? The dictionary said “to a stage of social, cultural, and moral development considered to be more advanced” so that would mean that it depends in your own culture. In the western culture civilized is when you eat not shrug, that u ask things politely, and behave at all times. In my African ethnic it seen to be polite to eat with your hands out of one bowl with the family and that you have your part of the bowl and not eat out of that part, that you say thank you to the person that cooked the food, burping things like that don’t really mater as long as you say excuse me.
In the colonial ages the Europeans would see Africans as savages because they don’t follow there way of civilized; the Africans hunted their food; the Europeans bought their food at the local market. Africans ate with their hands, Europeans with spoons forks and knives.
Now like Omar said I think the question might as well be restated because the definition to civilize is rather bias, and why would killing people be uncivilized (like Ms. Olson said)?
Well I see civilized as the politeness in a culture, so I would restate the question maybe “why do people kill”
And to answer that question I would say that it depends in what situation, has the person have an appropriate child hood or not. But when it comes to a state of war, I would say it that it all comes down to the propaganda. The propaganda made other culture look like savages, monsters, and many more. So then it would come down to you “I have to kill the beast to save the ‘civilized world’”. So when I think of “why do people kill?” I think because they think it’s the civilized thing to do. But that wouldn’t mean that killing isn’t uncivilized or is it
My Question:
Why is killing uncivilized? (Like Ms. Olson said)
To answer Stephan´s question:
To kill is to take another persons life away, to erase them from the present. Any family or friends will be deeply affected. Also, it can´t feel so good to be killed, so you hurt the person you kill too(obviously). Kindness is a key characteristic in life, it is important to have, and if you don´t have it, you will often be disliked. So when you kill, it removes any kindness that you had before. You doom friends and family of the victim to ever sorrow. That is why I think killing is uncivilized.
I think many soldiers thought "it is him or me". Not when they signed up to be a soldier, but when they crouched in the trenches or whatever. Many soldiers also must have been angry, there friends were killed by the people over at the other side. Soldiers must have been sad and their brains must have been totally mixed up by all the demolition and destruction. When you realize that it is me or them, killing becomes easier. And when you have seen your friend being shot in the head, I think you kind of get a bit angry and want to avenge their death.
My question: I saw in the movie that officers became angry over the "live and let live" system. Why? Why was it bad that they didn´t kill?
I think to answer this question in the most accurate way is not really possible since there are many definitions for civilized and uncivilized. For me, civilized people are people who have common sense, are wise, able to give advice, have the needed amount of knowledge to survive in this world or more. Since this is only my definition of civilized, it's not sure that other people will be satisfied with my response to why civilized people fight. My opinion is that normally, people will fight if they are provoked or if their authority or knowledge is questioned. Those people will act before they think and ,of course, by then ti would be to late to go back and they will have to suffer the consequences. That is my view of UNCIVILIZED people. CIVILIZED people on the other hand will think rationally about the decision they should make. Whether or not fighting is worth it will be thought over carefully. I guess the point I'm trying to make is that civilized people will only ,fight when they need to and that is in cases like wars. In the war, you are closest to death and know that any minute from now, you could be the one to go down. Survival is all that matters to you. You want to live so badly that you will do absolutely anything to stay alive. Even kill. Civilized people will fight in self defense. Very few "CIVILIZED" people will let themselves go and get into a fight that was worthless and did not need to occur, whereas uncivilized people will not only act in self defense but in order to recompense whoever the person is that angered or hurt them without giving their decision a second thought.
I find it very ironic how the term civilized only relates to the homosapien. You wouldn't call a snail civilized. Why is that? It's ironic because being a snail, it kills nothing. They eat leaves. But, still it isn't considered as a civilized creature. How ironic is the fact that the only animals in the world that can be uncivilized are the only ones which the term civilized can relate to.
I think, as I previously stated, to answer the first question, that they don't think they are killing a soul, causing melancholy to many others, but they are killing one of a nation. Also, during the war, there was a great advance in the technology of weaponry. All you have to do is toss a bomb over a trench, and ten could die. I think people, civilized or not, wouldn't kill ten if they had to strangle them to death. Sorry for being morbid. It's all about how hard it is to do. During the cold war, a man in an office pressed a button, sending an atomic bomb to me the bringer of Death to thousands (if I am correct). To think about how different the man (or woman I now realize, although probably not) would feel about killing thousands if he had to put a bullet in each one's head. It's like a topic we discussed during "Question of the Day". You have two scenarios. Your first scenario is where a train heading towards three people. If you pull the switch, it will run into only one person. The second scenario is where a TGV is about to kill three people and if you push a person in front of it, it would save the three people, but kill the man. People usually answer to the first scenario that they would pull the switch and save three people but kill one. For the second scenario, people's opinions vary, but mostly, they say that the would let the train kill the three people. I think that this is because you have to physically throw a man to his death. In the first one, it isn't a direct contact.
I think that people do this to "save their nation". They think it is for the greater good. In my personal opinion, the First War had no good guys and bad guys. Some may argue that the second war didn't either. But, nonetheless, it changes nothing. Thousands of people's may change the outcome of the situation, but even if the side they were fighting for lost, I don't think that what they were fighting for would be lost. They still have their home, their family.
Of course the war changes them. PTSD!! They now live with the regret of killing. They don't realize this while they are in the war because they haven't seen the outcome. They read of deaths in the newspapers when they are home, and they think, it like when I killed than man just because of his German uniform.
I agree with Omar, civilized is definitely relative. And, also, I think that people cannot become uncivilized during a war. I think that one cannot BECOME uncivilized. No offense, but, all humans are uncivilized. At least all rulers, dictators, etc. They choose who dies, and who lives. Maybe not directly, but who ever declared war decided the fate of millions, whether they suffer injury, die, suffer from famine/malnutrition. Even Obama, choosing the health care plan, is uncivilized. Certain things may seem minute, but they kill.
I find it quite ironic that people sentence killers to death. Also, I find it ironic that the same people who imprison others are the ones who, not direct, sign bills killing however many.
Nicolas D
I agree with rachel,all humans are uncivilized. people might do things that are inhumane but they dont notice it. In WWI (world war I) they were forced to kill because someone had told them to. People sometimes dont want to be uncivilized by doing bad stuff, such as killing, but people are forced to. For example, in a gang, the leader would tell one of his "minors", who in this case is a soldier,to go out and do something reaally bad without the person wanting to. People who do uncivilized things, such as maybe killing or taking a drug that affects their life, never really gets out of it. People who come from wars are usually completely changed by the life in the war they had, always seeing dead people or corpse, waking up one day, ur best friend dead next to you.
There are a lot of things you could do that are inhumane, like daily stuff, to bigger stuff such as seeing death next to you or going to war or killing someone because you were ordered to
NIKKI M, I FORGOT MY PASSWORD, SO I'M USING THIS ACOUNT.
I agree with Nicolas and Rachel, like Nicolas sad the soldiers do things int the war that are not humane. Nicolas also said that they do not now what they are diong. I dissagree with that, because they now what they are doing they just think that it is the right thing to do. For example on the propaganda posters on the side of France, Britain, ..., ect they made the germans look like monsters. Think about it if you would be killing "monsters" that are killing your friends, family, ect would killing them be the right thing to do?
I think that if you are trying to protect your people from dying it could be the right thing to do, but feeling guilty afterwards is part of it too.
I sort of agree with everyone,
But my own conclusion is that people kill to protect themselves, their land and the people they care about. Otherwise, what would be the point of killing. People don't kill for their government or king or president... but they kill for their country and the people they care about.
For example Serbia killed for their country to be Independent.
That was my point of view...
Wilson De Vroey
(Willyboy)
The term civilized is.... difficult
I dont think this question is one you can say yes or no to. I think that at some point everyone is civilized, they are just corrupted or something bad happens to them and they change. think of it as a act and react. People who arent civilized are those who enjoy inflicting pain on others, who enjoy killing people and feel no guilt or pain. I think that society says that it is bad to kill (illegal) becuase you are robbing someone of their life. And to be frank, most countries are under influence of religion. Religion has a prominant occurance in our lives. Religion can cause people to do awful things that they would never usually do. But the believe in their cause to the extent that they are blind to any of their previous inhabitions. People do things when they are under preassure, it is a survival instinct. It is easy to contemplate death from a cushy chair or if you are just having a discusion with your friends. It is easy to say "oh, I would never do that because it is against my morals". I am imagining my self in a war and I can honestly say that I would much rather kill than be killed. I wouldnt enjoy it, but when it comes down to it self-preservation is stronger than the desire to take pity on someone. Does that make me a bad person? Selfish? I dont know.
Why do people go into war?
its an interesting question, I agree with Julia and Omar. Propaganda is a huge part. But there are also other numerous and varied reasons. People might go to war because they are unemplyed, live in poverty, or have nothing else to live for; kind of like knowingly marching off to your own execution. My soldier (in the journal) is going to war because of all those four reasons. there are many more.
I dont think there is any concrete definition to civilized.
I have my opinion of course. But I also think there is no such thing as civilized. People are civilized if they believe they are. Suicide bombers think they are civilized. They are dying for a cause (not a good cause) but a cause none the less. They veiw themselves as martyrs.
But the rest of the world doesnt.
I am not trying to justify their actions but it is a good example. Im sure slave traders thought they were civilized. They believed that matirial objects (money, a house, soap) make people civilized. they believe that being white was civilized, because they were brought up to think that way.
MY QUESTION:
are death sentances wrong? do they count as murder?
There are some really bad people in the world,they ruin peoples lives, they terrorize, rape... lots of things. Do they deserve to die? Personaly... I think that some people just dont change, and eventually they will get out of jail and be even angrier then they were to begin with, and would end up wreaking havoc and killing people before they could be stopped and put in jail again. On the other hand... doesnt everyone deserve a second chance? what if you did change but no one believed you? and you ended up dying because you were angry at the world and lashed out in some violent way? and you actually felt guilty? Would it be "uncivilized" to condemn someone like that?
its a hard question for me, as you an see i have conflicting emotions with it.
i agree with evryone in a way.
civilized has different meanings to different people around the world.
like africans would say what stephan said, acting the way we do is civilized but others wouldn't agree with us.
in my opinion CIVILIZED doesn't have a specific meaning.
"civilized" people kill each other in war because they are forced to not because they want to, they also kill because they want to save their own lives & they want to feel good about what they did for their country.do you really think that any of the soldiers really wanted to kill each other even if they were destroying the world?
why do they do this?
they are forced or they feel the anger building up & they can't control themselves. they wanna feel the revenge or something. no one knows why they do it except for themselves because everyone has a reason to kill.
how does it affect them?
it affects them in many different ways. like someone had already said PTSD, they have all different reaction to whatever part of the army, navy or any part they are in.
do "civilized people become uncivilized during war?
there is no such thing as civilized. everyone is "civilized" in their own little way. a person acts however they want during war. everybody is civilized but they are also uncivilized. i think some people change during war. change is a better way i would put that. of course not everybody would stay the way they are after war. all that corruption and then coming home or even dieing and having everybody shouting at you, of course i would change too.
i don't think killing is civilized in my thoughts of what civilized is. think as killing someone as killing a close family member or friend, is that civilized?
MY QUESTIONS:
1) what does civilized really mean?
2)what is being uncivilized?3) if you were a soldier or colonel what would you categories as being civilized? (like senja's question)
4) how do people change before,during & after war?
5)why do people even participate in war?
6) what is pride, courage, power to a "civilized" person?
7) (you the part were the man goes & eats with them?) why did they make rules about that problem?
8) why do people tell each other to kill?
9) why does war even start in the first place? the world is supposed to be a peaceful place right!
10) why do some people get jealous easily that they end up doing what starts the bad stuff?
this is a very good subject and i like these discussions.
i really like the way everyone contributes what they think about the subject too.
xox
great job everyone! =}
Well i think everyone has a good opinion on why civilized people kill. But my opinion on why civilized people kill is that they want to win and show their country alot of pride!!! Propaganda like what yonas said is one of the biggest ones, because since they would see those posters they would be like wow its going to be easy we are going to beat them so bad!! We are so powerful and all that...
Civilized people kill because they don't want to die. But i disagree on johanna's and rodrigo's opinion because you can't be uncivilized when you go to war, because you need to have experience and a good past life. Not everyone can easily go to war. If you think about it if you went to war...you wouldnt just go there to watch, i mean eventually you will have to kill a lot of people. Its them who decide in going, because they know the consequences in going to war. Unless they were forced to go.
But why are we asking "why do civilized people kill" i mean is it only uncivilized people who kill. I think everyone civilized or uncivilized kills no matter what. It just has to depend on what it is.
-Medina:D
I have to disagree with Leila. Most of the soldier in WWI wanted to kill other soldier like the Austria-Hungarians. They were furious when their Archduke and his wife were assassinated. I mean I would feel the same way if someone in my family or close to me was killed by someone I didn't like. I would get them back! Yes they probalby did want to kill eachother, but the powers that were fighting probably weren't think about what the world would be after the war. Don't you think? Another thing that I would like to point out about what Leila wrote was, that soldiers were not forced to have revenge on someone. Its like saying your angry at the person and you want to hurt them even though they didn't do anything to you. The soldiers were trained to not back down and to not take advantage of their opponent. Yes some of them may have not gotten control of themselves but that doesn't mean that their colonels or someone told them, "Alright soldier this is what your suppose to do. I want you to go mad and kill! kill! kill! Don't think about anyone else but your self got it!" No they taught them to be strong and to fight 'til the end. (sorry if I am emphazizing to much on you Leila). But there is something else too, I would like to share. Leila is right about one thing, the soldiers in the war were affected with PTSD, but technically it didn't matter what navy or position you were in. You would still see dead bodies lie around and you'd still be killing people. The sounds, the mass destruction, the loss of friends, and the killing could easily change you. It necessesarily doesn't really matter what location or what job you are doing really.
For medina's response, I also have to disagree with her on something, you don't exactly have to have an experience before going to war. It's like saying that you've killed people in the past and you seem used to it. Imagine yourself being a killer right now and saying, "What the heck, I've killed enough people in the past and have gone to jail. It wouldn't be so hard killing a couple of more guys." Now imagine yourself being a normal citizen, " I wonder what I'll expect if I go to war?" You need to understand and know the unexpected instead of always taking short cuts. You need to take the time to look at something instead of just saying that its nothing. Well if you look at something hard enough you'll see something amazing or frightening or something. But all I am trying to say is, is that you need to at least get to know something and to know what is expected before taking a jump to the next level.
-that's all see ya! :)
sorry on one part i said that the soldiers were trained not to take advantage of their opponent. What i meant to say was they are trained for their opponent not to take advantage of them. Also, revenge builds and grows deep inside of you until it finally over comes you. The majors and colonels might have told them to take their revenge on the other nations, but I doubt that they actually forced them. (but then again you never know really.
To answer Leila's 9th question. When tension grows between two or more countries (most likely 2), there is a certain point after those two or more countries finally get tired of threatening eachother, they usually would like to express their anger out in the open fighting. But that's just my opinion.
To answer Leila's last question - people will get jealous because they want something a little more than that other person. They'll do whatever means necessary to take whatever it is that they have. Even if it means hurting someone or killing them. People who are very envious with the things around us, usually result as a person who could be very dangerous in many ways, whether it is physically, emotionally, or mentally. (like I said that's just my opinion.)
Hi everybody!
This is Senja's sister, DonaMaria; I'm sorry if I'm intruding, but I found this question posted on the blog particularly interesting, so I would like to say what I think.
About what Ms. Olson put within the blog, I don't think that to kill people is civilized, even if civilized people do kill. Civilized people could kill for several reasons:
1)They could be emotionally driven by extreme sadness/anger
2)They might be trying to avenge a realtive or close friend
3)They could be trying to "settle a score"
4)They might be benefiting from it, (i.e. with money, more "safety", no more "threats", etc.) kind of like a paid assassin would be
5)They could be someone in debt, and they can't pay off the money (or don't want to pay off the money), so killing the person they owe would be easy.
For killing being against the law, I thought I knew the answer immidiately, because I know it's wrong to kill, but exactly why would confuse many people.
I think it is against the law because the people who made that thought that every life is of value. I believe that every person on earth has something special that they can do, better than anyone else can do, or even something nobody can do. I learned that Albert Einstein didn't start talking until he was 3 or 4 because he wanted what he was going to say come out the way he wanted it to. He came up with the formula for electricity, and he came up with atomic bombs.
Point blank, there are civilized people who do uncivilized things.
Now why people think it's right to kill one person and not the other is wrong. But there are instances when killing is civilized, opposing what I think, when it is done for the Greater Good. For instance, if a terrorist kidnaps the President of the United States, when the CIA, FBI, ATF, SWAT Team, or whoever captures the terrorist, they're going to put the terrorist to death so that it won't happen again from that terrorist.
I also have a question:
When in certain circumstances, as if facing a life or death matter for you or loved ones, if you are greatly outnumbered, would you kill them (them meaning the killers) all? And if so, how would you feel? "Uncivilized"? How would your loved ones react?
That's all I have to say. Bye!
I'll have to apologize for my sister, her account was set that way so it showed up as speedygonzulus. but anyways i showed her this blog and she seemed very interesting, so Ms. Olson, if it wouldn't bother you if she could pop in sometime and maybe blog a bit?
Senja, your sister is encouraged to respond to the blog!
Post a Comment