So if there really was this vast, widespread impulse to toss away one’s life for honour, why… isn’t every able-bodied male in the west rushing to Ukraine?
Because it’s not their country. When people’s own tribe are attacked the rates of volunteerism are much higher; and when people are defending their personal honor in the right social context the rates of volunteerism are higher still. I can’t find the source but apparently one motivation for American armed forces’ anti-dueling provisions was that more people were dying in duels than dying in the actual fighting during the war of 1812.
And I would say that MMA, boxing, civilian sport shooting competitions etc. are as popular as they are because of this instinct.
When people’s own tribe are attacked the rates of volunteerism are much higher
That sounds less like “the men crave warfare” and more like “the men like their homes, their wives, their children, and will fight to defend them if someone tries to destroy them”. The war is the means, not the end. I’d bet if you asked the Ukrainian soldiers, most of them will say that they’d rather this war didn’t happen.
I can’t find the source but apparently one motivation for American armed forces’ anti-dueling provisions was that more people were dying in duels than dying in the actual fighting during the war of 1812
Duels were also about peer pressure. In a social circle in which everyone expects you to defend your honour by duelling, if someone insults you, you duel, because the alternative is to become a social outcast, and that’s worse. That doesn’t mean that there was a lot of martial thrill involved. Lots of actual descriptions of real duels sound like the duellists were scared and not particularly into it (cf. Philip Hamilton vs George Eacker) and things like shooting up in the air (deloping) were developed precisely as a way to try reconciling the social need for the duel with the personal need to not fucking die.
And I would say that MMA, boxing, civilian sport shooting competitions etc. are as popular as they are because of this instinct.
All sorts of sports that involve some kind of more or less simulated aggression certainly draw on our natural aggression (which obviously women possess too in some measure, since these sports aren’t unisex). But your claim is stronger, that there is some pressure so large that there would be a literal need for coliseums and gladiator fights to fulfil it. And I’m saying that that can’t be the case because if it was there would not be enough gyms for all the MMA fighters around. Anyone who doesn’t have the guts to get on a ring surely would never go into a deadly gladiatorial battle. The point remains that people might crave a sensation or a vibe in abstract, but that vague desire doesn’t actually survive impact with the reality of any form of actual violence—pain, fear, danger, fatigue, and lots, lots, LOTS of hard work before you even have a prayer of fighting on even ground with a professional.
That sounds less like “the men crave warfare” and more like “the men like their homes, their wives, their children, and will fight to defend them if someone tries to destroy them”.
Yes, there is certainly a kind of altruistic motivation too, but it doesn’t really explain why individuals seem to be eager to defend their country. A particular Ukrainian soldier’s contribution to the battle is not going to turn the tide to or from victory and defend their particular family. It also doesn’t really explain anecdotes like the following, where people in these circumstances seem distraught to the point of depression if an authority figure tells them they get to sit the conflict out. This certainly doesn’t apply to all men, not even most men (you can see a direct followup with another person where it’s very much the opposite) but it does apply for some of them.
I’d bet if you asked the Ukrainian soldiers, most of them will say that they’d rather this war didn’t happen.
Well of course they’re going to say that; I’m absolutely not saying otherwise either. War itself is almost entirely collateral damage. Modern warfare in particular is also so completely unrewarding for the combatants that it removes most of any kind of potential for glory. Getting shelled randomly by artillery so that someone else doesn’t is not the kind of thing people imagine when they imagine fighting.
But your claim is stronger, that there is some pressure so large that there would be a literal need for coliseums and gladiator fights to fulfil it. And I’m saying that that can’t be the case because if it was there would not be enough gyms for all the MMA fighters around.
Yes, there is certainly a kind of altruistic motivation too, but it doesn’t really explain why individuals seem to be eager to defend their country.
It’s basic Golden Rule stuff. Sure, the army maybe would win without me. But if everyone thought that way and was a freerider, no one would go fight in the army, and the war would be lost. People feel responsible, they feel guilty, they feel ashamed, they have a sense of duty and of what’s right.
You know who else was a young hot-blooded male? All those Russian men who booked it as soon as the invasion started just so they could escape conscription. Russia mostly ended up needing to conscript and press-gang people into fighting its stupid pointless war, because unlike Ukrainians, these men could see clear as day that they had absolutely no good reason to risk their life, and they didn’t give a shit if their country lost.
You realize over a million people in the U.S. practice competitive MMA, right? Say ~0.25% of those people are interested in mortal combat. There’s your arena.
0.25% of 1 million is 2500 people. Hardly a massive social problem that needs addressing with an escape valve. Having a ban on death matches is necessary to prevent people who do NOT crave the battlefield from being variously socially or economically pressured in risking (and losing) their life, as it used to be. If this means that 2500 MMA fighters are a bit frustrated by the impossibility to engage openly and legally in deadly combat on live TV as their berserker hearts would wish, well, tough luck. It’s not even that they can’t do that anyway privately—they just need to be willing to risk jail besides their life.
Because it’s not their country. When people’s own tribe are attacked the rates of volunteerism are much higher; and when people are defending their personal honor in the right social context the rates of volunteerism are higher still. I can’t find the source but apparently one motivation for American armed forces’ anti-dueling provisions was that more people were dying in duels than dying in the actual fighting during the war of 1812.
And I would say that MMA, boxing, civilian sport shooting competitions etc. are as popular as they are because of this instinct.
That sounds less like “the men crave warfare” and more like “the men like their homes, their wives, their children, and will fight to defend them if someone tries to destroy them”. The war is the means, not the end. I’d bet if you asked the Ukrainian soldiers, most of them will say that they’d rather this war didn’t happen.
Duels were also about peer pressure. In a social circle in which everyone expects you to defend your honour by duelling, if someone insults you, you duel, because the alternative is to become a social outcast, and that’s worse. That doesn’t mean that there was a lot of martial thrill involved. Lots of actual descriptions of real duels sound like the duellists were scared and not particularly into it (cf. Philip Hamilton vs George Eacker) and things like shooting up in the air (deloping) were developed precisely as a way to try reconciling the social need for the duel with the personal need to not fucking die.
All sorts of sports that involve some kind of more or less simulated aggression certainly draw on our natural aggression (which obviously women possess too in some measure, since these sports aren’t unisex). But your claim is stronger, that there is some pressure so large that there would be a literal need for coliseums and gladiator fights to fulfil it. And I’m saying that that can’t be the case because if it was there would not be enough gyms for all the MMA fighters around. Anyone who doesn’t have the guts to get on a ring surely would never go into a deadly gladiatorial battle. The point remains that people might crave a sensation or a vibe in abstract, but that vague desire doesn’t actually survive impact with the reality of any form of actual violence—pain, fear, danger, fatigue, and lots, lots, LOTS of hard work before you even have a prayer of fighting on even ground with a professional.
Yes, there is certainly a kind of altruistic motivation too, but it doesn’t really explain why individuals seem to be eager to defend their country. A particular Ukrainian soldier’s contribution to the battle is not going to turn the tide to or from victory and defend their particular family. It also doesn’t really explain anecdotes like the following, where people in these circumstances seem distraught to the point of depression if an authority figure tells them they get to sit the conflict out. This certainly doesn’t apply to all men, not even most men (you can see a direct followup with another person where it’s very much the opposite) but it does apply for some of them.
Well of course they’re going to say that; I’m absolutely not saying otherwise either. War itself is almost entirely collateral damage. Modern warfare in particular is also so completely unrewarding for the combatants that it removes most of any kind of potential for glory. Getting shelled randomly by artillery so that someone else doesn’t is not the kind of thing people imagine when they imagine fighting.
You realize over a million people in the U.S. practice competitive MMA, right? Say ~0.25% of those people are interested in mortal combat. There’s your arena, at least for the largest cities like Los Angeles or New York.
It’s basic Golden Rule stuff. Sure, the army maybe would win without me. But if everyone thought that way and was a freerider, no one would go fight in the army, and the war would be lost. People feel responsible, they feel guilty, they feel ashamed, they have a sense of duty and of what’s right.
You know who else was a young hot-blooded male? All those Russian men who booked it as soon as the invasion started just so they could escape conscription. Russia mostly ended up needing to conscript and press-gang people into fighting its stupid pointless war, because unlike Ukrainians, these men could see clear as day that they had absolutely no good reason to risk their life, and they didn’t give a shit if their country lost.
0.25% of 1 million is 2500 people. Hardly a massive social problem that needs addressing with an escape valve. Having a ban on death matches is necessary to prevent people who do NOT crave the battlefield from being variously socially or economically pressured in risking (and losing) their life, as it used to be. If this means that 2500 MMA fighters are a bit frustrated by the impossibility to engage openly and legally in deadly combat on live TV as their berserker hearts would wish, well, tough luck. It’s not even that they can’t do that anyway privately—they just need to be willing to risk jail besides their life.