The Moral Equivalent of War speech was a speech in which US President Jimmy Carter addressed the people of the United States on April 18, 1977. The speech is remembered for his comparison of the 1970s energy crisis with the “moral equivalent of war.” Carter gave ten principles for the plan but did not list specific actions.
What is the moral equivalent of war by William James?
William James – The Moral Equivalent of War The Moral Equivalent of War by William James This essay, based on a speech delivered at Stanford University in 1906, is the origin of the idea of organized national service.
What is Jimmy Carter’s moral equivalent of war?
United States President Jimmy Carter ‘s Moral Equivalent of War speech was a speech in which Carter addressed the United States on April 18, 1977. It is remembered as the speech where he compared the energy crisis with the “moral equivalent of war”. Carter gave ten principles for the plan, but did not list specific actions.
Is War the only force that can discipline?
So far, war has been the only force that can discipline a whole community, and until and equivalent discipline is organized, I believe that war must have its way.
What are virtues that prevail in war?
The virtues that prevail, it must be noted, are virtues anyhow, superiorities that count in peaceful as well as in military competition; but the strain is on them, being infinitely intenser in the latter case, makes war infinitely more searching as a trial. No ordeal is comparable to its winnowings.
What is the moral equivalent of war?
The Moral Equivalent of War speech was a speech in which US President Jimmy Carter addressed the people of the United States on April 18, 1977. The speech is remembered for his comparison of the 1970s energy crisis with the “moral equivalent of war.”. Carter gave ten principles for the plan but did not list specific actions.
Where did the phrase “moral equivalent of war” come from?
The phrase has become so well known that it is referenced in literature. Carter used the phrase from the classic essay “The Moral Equivalent of War,” which was derived from the speech given by the American psychologist and philosopher William James, delivered at Stanford University in 1906, and the subsequent book, published in 1910, …
What was the acronym for the Moral Equivalent of War speech?
In the news media, and following neither congressional action nor public mobilization, Carter’s “Moral Equivalent of War” speech and his energy recommendations became known by its biting acronym, MEOW.
What is the moral equivalent of war?
Modern war was, James thought, too barbaric in itself to be considered a worthy means to any conceivable end.
What was William James’s moral equivalent of war?
Many of these currents came together in William James’s 1910 essay, “The Moral Equivalent of War,” which was adapted from a lecture he had delivered at Stanford University four years earlier. Modern war was, James thought, too barbaric in itself to be considered a worthy means to any conceivable end. But, he added, his fellow pacifists too often failed to consider that the regimen of war gives rise to human excellences that are genuine and precious, and that form an essential part of the human constitution — not to mention the foundation of civilized existence itself. “Martial virtues,” James ventured to say, “must be the enduring cement; intrepidity, contempt of softness, surrender of private interest, obedience to command, must still remain the rock upon which states are built.” The task at hand was finding some way of incorporating “the old elements of army-discipline” into “the more or less socialistic future,” and of making “new energies and hardihoods continue the manliness to which the military mind so faithfully clings.”
What was Roosevelt’s vision for the future?
It was time to discard the past’s inefficient social and economic institutions — whose foundations rested upon outdated ideals of individualism and competition — and replace them with cooperative institutions undergirded by a great and all-embracing solidarity, which would enable a united nation to move forward toward an ever brighter future.
Why did James fail to generate viable offspring?
One clue as to why James’s superficially appealing theory has failed to generate viable offspring in practice may be his way of understanding war — or, more specifically, what is missing from his understanding. His essay was notably subtle and sympathetic in portraying the admirable aspect of the military character. But James understood war only in the most abstract, generic, and external way, giving no attention to the things that wars are properly fought about and for. In other words, he spoke of war as if its purpose were that of organizing the community and promoting virtues of “hardihood,” when those things are best understood as adventitious byproducts of the pursuit of some other purpose, or as means to support some other end. It is as if one viewed the superb physical conditioning of highly trained Olympic athletes as an end to be admired in itself, rather than as the essential instrument by which these athletes would achieve success in their respective competitions — indeed, as if it were imaginable that they might ever have risen to such heights without victory as their goal.
Who said you never want a serious crisis to happen?
One hears in Leuchtenburg’s words a premonitory hint of the now familiar dictum of President Obama’s chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, that crises should be understood as opportunities “to do things that you could not do before” and “you never want a serious crisis to go to waste.”
Is the analogy of war unique to Obama?
The use of the analogy of war for such a purpose is hardly unique to Obama. It has been a remarkably common trope of presidents — especially presidents on the left — for the better part of a century, often called upon when liberal ambitions have run into resistance from the American constitutional system, or the American public.
Learn about this topic in these articles
William James’s widely read essay The Moral Equivalent of War (1910). Just as military conscription provided basic economic security and instilled a sense of duty to confront a nation’s enemies, so James called for the draft of the “whole youthful population to form for a certain number of years a…
progressivism
William James’s widely read essay The Moral Equivalent of War (1910). Just as military conscription provided basic economic security and instilled a sense of duty to confront a nation’s enemies, so James called for the draft of the “whole youthful population to form for a certain number of years a…
What would be the only force that could work ideals of honor and standards of efficiency into English or American natures?
It would be simply preposterous if the only force that could work ideals of honor and standards of efficiency into English or American natures should be the fear of being killed by the Germans or the Japanese. Great indeed is fear; but it is not, as our military enthusiasts believe and try to make us believe, the only stimulus known for awakening the higher ranges of men’s spiritual energy. The amount of alteration in public opinion which my utopia postulates is vastly less than the difference between the mentality of those black warriors who pursued Stanley’s party on the Congo with their cannibal war cry of “Meat! Meat!” and that of the “general staff” of any civilized nation. History has seen the latter interval bridged over: The former one can be bridged over much more easily.
What are the martial virtues?
Martial virtues must be the enduring cement; intrepidity, contempt of softness, surrender of private interest, obedience to command must still remain the rock upon which states are built.
What is the point of view of pacifists?
Pacifists ought to enter more deeply into the aesthetical and ethical point of view of their opponents. Do that first in any controversy, then move the point, and your opponent will follow. So long as antimilitarists propose no substitute for war’s disciplinary function, no moral equivalent of war, analogous, as one might say, to the mechanical equivalent of heat, so long they fail to realize the full inwardness of the situation. And, as a rule, they do fail. The duties, penalties, and sanctions pictured in the utopias they paint are all too weak and tame to touch the military-minded. Tolstoy’s pacifism is the only exception to this rule, for it is profoundly pessimistic as regards all this world’s values, and makes the fear of the Lord furnish the moral spur provided elsewhere by the fear of the enemy. But our socialistic peace-advocates all believe absolutely in this world’s values; and instead of the fear of the Lord and the fear of the enemy, the only fear they reckon with is the fear of poverty if one be lazy. This weakness pervades all the socialistic literature with which I am acquainted. Meanwhile, men at large still live as they always have lived, under a pain-and-fear economy—for those of us who live in an ease-economy are but an island in the stormy ocean—and the whole atmosphere of present-day utopian literature tastes mawkish and dishwatery to people who still keep a sense for life’s more bitter flavors. It suggests, in truth, ubiquitous inferiority.
What did William James consider substitutes for?
William James considers substitutes for martial experience. The war against war is going to be no holiday excursion or camping party. The military feelings are too deeply grounded to abdicate their place among our ideals until better substitutes are offered than the glory and shame that come to nations as well as to individuals from …
Is war so expensive?
Modern war is so expensive that we feel trade to be a better avenue to plunder; but modern man inherits all the innate pugnacity and all the love of glory of his ancestors. Showing war’s irrationality and horror is of no effect upon him. The horrors make the fascination. War is the strong life; it is life in extremis; war taxes are the only ones men never hesitate to pay, as the budgets of all nations show us.
Can martial character be bred without war?
The martial type of character can be bred without war. Strenuous honor and disinterestedness abound everywhere. Priests and medical men are in a fashion educated to it, and we should all feel some degree of its imperative if we were conscious of our work as an obligatory service to the state. We should be owned, as soldiers are by the army, and our pride would rise accordingly. We could be poor, then, without humiliation, as army officers now are.
Is “peace” a synonym for “war expected”?
“Peace” in military mouths today is a synonym for “war expected.”. The word has become a pure provocative, and no government wishing peace sincerely should allow it ever to be printed in a newspaper.
What is the moral equivalent of war?
Unlike other scholars who interpret William James’ s “The Moral Equivalent of War” in light of the author’s other writings, I read the essay as James’s contribution to conversations being held within the pre-World War One international peace movement. The essay shares the vocabulary, images, and patterns of reasoning widely employed by others in the movement. James’s analysis of violence described a standard frame of mind at that time. Like many of his contemporaries, he assumed that war had contributed to social cohesion and strenuousness in the past, but that this was no longer the case. Like them, he assumed “civilized nations” were moving into a socialist future without war. His specific proposal to enlist young men to fight against nature was not original. Reading James’s essay through this lens demonstrates that it was at best a minor variation on commonly held themes.
What did James say about the Greek wars?
Ancient Greek wars were wars of plunder. James quotes Thucydides on how the Athenians’ cruelty gave them dominance over the Meleans, and comments,
