[lit-ideas] Re: Sacrifice
- From: "Richard Koenigsberg, Ph.D." <libraryofsocialscience@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 13 Feb 2005 07:52:30 -0500
I'm sure there is such a thing as healthy sacrifice, altruism, etc.
that occurs in the course of normal, everyday life.
However, what I was writing about in the post that generated this
discussion was irrational self-sacrifice in the name of the nation, the =
way
in which soldiers were asked to go to their deaths by getting out of
trenches and walking into machine gun fire during the First World War. =
In
the passage below, one may note that the general thought that it was a =
GOOD
THING the way the soldiers were massacred, because their devotion =
testified
to their "love of country," belief in the goodness and greatness of =
Great
Britain and its empire. This is a perfect example of "intentional
self-sacrifice."
The soldiers in the First World War--in terms of the massiveness of
the sacrifice that they made--put contemporary martyrs to shame. =
However, we
have tried to forget this astonishing episode of self-destruction, to =
forget
the irrationality and sadness of Western warfare.
I'm asking you to look at it with me, to not avoid the encounter, to
attempt to comprehend--or at least to LOOK AT what happened. If one =
looks at
what happened, truly encounters it, one does not have to understand what
happened too quickly. Indeed, the appropropriate response should be =
shock,
and awe.
I've reproduced below a part of my original post.
With regards,
Richard Koenigsberg
--------------------------------------------
In the following report, British General Rees describes the massacre of =
his
own brigade as they moved toward German lines.
=20
"They advanced in line after line, dressed as if on parade and not a man
shirked going through the extremely heavy barrage, or facing the machine =
gun
and rifle fire that finally wiped them out. I saw the lines, which =
advanced
in such admirable order melting away under fire. Yet not a man wavered,
broke the ranks, or attempted to come back. I have never seen, indeed =
could
never have imagined such a magnificent display of gallantry, discipline =
and
determination. The reports from the very few survivors of this marvelous
advance bear out what I saw with my own eyes: that hardly a man of ours =
got
to the German Front line."
It is evident that in spite of the total failure of the attack, General =
Rees
regarded the destruction of his brigade in a positive light. He observes
that not a man "shirked" in the face of the machine gun and rifle fire =
that
wiped them out. He is proud that even though his troops were "melting =
away
under fire," the soldiers continued to advance "in admirable order." In =
the
face of the barrage of bullets, his men did not waver, break ranks, or
attempt to come back. The General gushes that he had never seen such a
magnificent display of "gallantry, discipline and determination." =
Although
his soldiers were slaughtered and "hardly a man of ours got to the =
German
Front line," he characterizes the advance as "marvelous."
=20
Or perhaps is it more accurate to say that the General believed the =
assault
was marvelous precisely because British soldiers had been slaughtered. =
The
General does not view the battle from the perspective of success or =
failure.
His perception is shaped, rather, by his judgment of the morale and =
spirit
demonstrated by his troops. It is the fact that his soldiers were being
riddled with bullets--yet continued to advance--that leads him to =
conclude
that the attack had been "marvelous."=20
=20
General Rees responded positively to the slaughter of his own men =
because he
viewed their behavior as a testimonial to the depth of their devotion. =
By
virtue of the fact that they did not shirk but continued to advance in =
the
face of machine-gun fire, his troops showed that they were committed
absolutely to the ideals of Great Britain, the British Empire and its
leaders. Willingness to walk into machine-gun fire provided definitive =
proof
that the soldiers loved their country.
=20
Soldiers during the First World War were required to adopt a posture of
absolute submission to their nation and its leaders--obedience unto =
death.
Conscientious objectors in Britain during the First World War were
disenfranchised. Some thought that soldiers who had not seen overseas
service should have the right to vote taken away from them. In the First
World War, the social consensus was that the body of the soldier =
belonged to
the nation-state. The nation could use these bodies as it saw fit.=20
=20
War requires that the soldier hand over his body to his country. In =
order to
encourage men to do be willing to do this, the soldier's role is =
represented
in terms such as honor, masculinity and virility. In the First World =
War,
however, being honorable, masculine and virile was equivalent to =
entering a
situation where there was substantial probability that one would be
slaughtered. One demonstrated one's virility by getting out of a trench =
and
walking into machine gun fire. Such is the strange paradox of war: That
"goodness" or morality requires a posture of abject submission; that =
"love"
requires self- destruction; that willingness to die becomes the highest =
form
of virtue.
-----------------------------------------------------=20
-----Original Message-----
From: lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx =
[mailto:lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of JimKandJulieB@xxxxxxx
Sent: Sunday, February 13, 2005 6:18 AM
To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Sacrifice
=20
<<Anyone know of examples of intentional self-sacrifice?>>=20
The implication seems to be self-sacrifice to the point of death. Is =
that=20
the parameter which frames the question? And I have to ask =
self-sacrifice
of=20
physical life? Self-sacrifice of soul? Of psyche (mental health, =
i.e.)?
Self-sacrifice of physical well-being or physical existence? Millions =
of =20
people commit acts of intentional self-sacrifice daily...are you asking
strictly =20
if there are those who allow themselves to be physically killed
intentionally,=20
for the perceived good of another?=20
Julie Krueger =20
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3DOriginal Message=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D =
Subj: [lit-ideas] Re: Sacrifice Date:
2/13/05 2:52:33 A.M. Central Standard Time From: _andreas@xxxxxxxxxxxx=20
(mailto:andreas@xxxxxxxxxxx) To: _lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx=20
(mailto:lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx) Sent on: =20
Marlena brought up the issue of sacrifice and I've been thinking about =
it=20
off and on for the=20
last few days.
The fellow who dives into a river to save a stranger isn't planning on=20
suicide or =20
self-sacrifice; he thinks he will save the stranger.
The same applies to nearly all in the military: they all think they =
will=20
survive the battle =20
and the war. If US soldiers knew they were going to certain death in =
Iraq, I
seriously doubt=20
the US would be able to send them.
Self-sacrifice should apply only those who knowingly go to their death,
such=20
as Palestinian =20
suicide bombers, Japanese kamikaze, Islamic jihad, and others.
But it seems to me that Islamic jihadi don't kill themselves; they =
believe=20
they immediately=20
enter into paradise. Okay, we know different, but in the mind of the =
jihadi
as he pushes the=20
button, he isn't killing himself.
I can't think of any modern intentional suicidal self-sacrifice, asides
from=20
kamikaze. As=20
for kamikaze, I don't know enough about them to say anything about their =
=20
intentions.
Anyone know of examples of intentional self-sacrifice?
yrs,
andreas
www.andreas.com
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
