most of history’s soldiers were not volunteers but conscripts. In pre-modern times the bargain was this: come with the army or die immediately.
There are many good answers in this thread, but this is the important part that was missing from most of them.
As I was reading about how we are optimized for war by evolution, how war is a way to get resources and signal bravery… I was wondering why do the governments even bother to convince their own population that they were attacked, instead of saying: “adventure and epic loot, join our attack on Victimistan!”
And although there are definitely people for whom “adventure and loot” is a sufficient motivation, they seem to be a minority in the population, so unless you are attacking a much weaker enemy, you need additional soldiers. Then your options are conscription, and increasing the social pressure by saying that the war is defensive. (Also, calling the war defensive makes the conscription politically more acceptable.)
Seems to me that the whole answer has three parts:
some people enjoy the war;
some people can profit from the war without participating in it directly;
and other people can be forced to fight, by a combination of threat and propaganda.
The first explains why the idea of war is not considered as repulsive as e.g. cannibalism. The second explains why the wars (against enemy too big to be defeated by the first group alone) actually happen; and the third explains how.
There are many good answers in this thread, but this is the important part that was missing from most of them.
As I was reading about how we are optimized for war by evolution, how war is a way to get resources and signal bravery… I was wondering why do the governments even bother to convince their own population that they were attacked, instead of saying: “adventure and epic loot, join our attack on Victimistan!”
And although there are definitely people for whom “adventure and loot” is a sufficient motivation, they seem to be a minority in the population, so unless you are attacking a much weaker enemy, you need additional soldiers. Then your options are conscription, and increasing the social pressure by saying that the war is defensive. (Also, calling the war defensive makes the conscription politically more acceptable.)
Seems to me that the whole answer has three parts:
some people enjoy the war;
some people can profit from the war without participating in it directly;
and other people can be forced to fight, by a combination of threat and propaganda.
The first explains why the idea of war is not considered as repulsive as e.g. cannibalism. The second explains why the wars (against enemy too big to be defeated by the first group alone) actually happen; and the third explains how.