>What is less problematic is the fact that the prowar discourse has a strong
>metaphysical tone. The opponent is inherently evil and the enemy of being.
>There's an absolute line between the good ones and the bad ones. The good
>ones are the defenders of mankind, because they serve the supreme god. They
>have been chosen to do so. They are blessed by the god which rewards them
>with technology, because they live in the chosen nation.
I wonder if one has always had to demonize one's opponent in the
line/trench opposite in order to kill him?
Perhaps this is metaphysical, perhaps it is pragmatic in order to
rouse the populace to war?
>metaphysical tone. The opponent is inherently evil and the enemy of being.
>There's an absolute line between the good ones and the bad ones. The good
>ones are the defenders of mankind, because they serve the supreme god. They
>have been chosen to do so. They are blessed by the god which rewards them
>with technology, because they live in the chosen nation.
I wonder if one has always had to demonize one's opponent in the
line/trench opposite in order to kill him?
Perhaps this is metaphysical, perhaps it is pragmatic in order to
rouse the populace to war?