Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by inglor_cz 1988 days ago
Wars are scary regardless of who makes the decisions, but I think that the situation where the army obeys civilians is, in general, much better than the one where the military decides whether it wants to go to (or continue) a war or not.

For example, it seems that the civilian elite of Germany and Austria-Hungary was ambivalent about war in early 1918, especially in A-H, and willing to entertain possible ceasefire with subsequent negotiations; but serious peace negotiations were not possible anymore, because the de facto power shifted to general Ludendorff and other high officers, who were determined to go on.

2 comments

I don’t think what the GP found disturbing was civilian control of the military, but the distance between the decisionmakers choosing to go to war and the people bearing the cost, which is not significantly different in systems which lack civilian control of the military than those that have it.
This is perhaps an argument to have more veterans in politics.

Former Czechoslovak president Ludvík Svoboda, a general who fought in the WWII and went through some of the bloodiest battles involving Czechoslovak forces [0], was known to be very wary of militaristic ideas later.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Dukla_Pass

This probably is an appropriate time to Godwin the discussion and point out a certain Austrian/German leader's very different ideas were also shaped by his negative experiences of a world war. Veterans react differently even to similar experiences and cover the full range of positions on war from gung ho militarism to unapologetic pacifism. Perhaps military experience lends them a more informed perspective on what the realistic outcomes of a war might look like, but it's no inoculation against militarism.
In the United States, we specifically block appointment of officials to civilian office that have recently left military service with the National Security Act of 1947 [0]. A waiver from Congress is required to grant exception to this rule, and the first time that waiver was ever sought and granted was just a few years ago in 2017 for General James Mattis to serve as Secretary of Defense only a few years after retirement from the Marines.

[0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Security_Act_of_194...

It is probably an argument for having diverse views in politics in general, and beyond quick reactions, limiting the power to declare war, or engage in aggression more broadly, to more control by deliberative bodies
Just as Eisenhower warned of the growing influence of the military-industrial complex in 1960.
This is not always the outcome with veterans though, and veterans experiences are not uniform.
They are, however, informed by experiences in uniform.
Well it was said that Prussia was an Army with a nation vs. everywhere else. (nation with an Army) This militaristic attitude most likely fed the mindset of crushing of the Revolts of 1848 in Germany, and probably had a big influence on starting WW1. A large group of Germans who became disillusioned with the path that Germany was headed down migrated to the US after that. This probably furthered Prussia/Germany down the more aggressive militaristic path.