1 Ben Hardy
To what extent was involvement in war a catalyst for new ideas of citizenship?
Whilst participation in war did lead to new ideas concerning citizenship, exemplified by
the creation of the welfare state in Britain for example, war itself is unideal in terms of
presenting people with appropriate standards of living. Historians such as Hannah Arendt
have focused on the sheer brutality of war with the genocide of Jewish people during the
Second World War being reflective of humanity’s guilt as a collective accusation1. Often new
ideas of citizenship that emerged during the bloody twentieth century therefore had to be
negotiated against the backdrop of grief, mourning and destruction of communities. Marxist
and revisionist historians have focused on the horrors of war, especially in light of
technological advances that threatened to wipe out civilizations rather than developing
ideas of citizenship. Hobsbawm suggested that humans were at risk of being part of an
‘explosion and implosion’ of the world. 2 Such a threat was never actualized although it
emphasised the instability and insecurity produced by war. This essay will thus examine the
magnitude of catalysing citizenship in post-war conditions.
War is fundamentally a struggle, requiring massive financial support, as well as costing
many lives, both civilian and military, rather than being overwhelmingly associated with
positive reform and new ideas of citizenship. European nations waged direct warfare as
enemies rather than collaborating together to improve citizenship. Indeed, ‘a total
reordering of the globe was at stake’ as nations fought for territory and resources. 3 These
1
M. Geyer, ‘The Place of the Second World War in German memory and history’, in New German Critique: An
Interdisciplinary Journal of German Studies, (71) (1971), pg. 36.
2
E. Hobsbawm, The Age of Extremes 1914-1991, (2nd edn., London, 1994), pg. 585.
3
G.L. Weinberg, A world at arms: a global history of World War II, (Cambridge, 1994), pg. 2.
2 Ben Hardy
ambitions were the result of the ‘deranged logic’ of dictators such as Adolf Hitler, whose
policy of Lebensraum exposed ethnic minorities. 4 Unnecessary brutality wiped out entire
communities, and meant that citizenship would be restricted to certain ‘purities’. The fact
that five to six million5 European Jewish people were slaughtered emphasises that the scale
of deaths were enough to prevent citizenship completely, since masses were deprived of
their life, let alone individual rights. Elsewhere, over twenty million Soviet Union citizens
were killed by German armies.6 These figures undermine reforms that sought to improve
citizenship, such as the introduction of a comprehensive school system. Moreover, the end
of global warfare did not necessarily mean that large-scale killings would stop. Indeed, by
the 1970s, dictatorships such as Francoist Spain continued, with estimates stating that the
number of Republican supporters killed and buried in unmarked graves during and after the
Spanish Civil War being around thirty thousand.7 Citizenship is completely disregarded, as
the victims are dehumanized and mistreated, without suitable burials. This emphasises that
violence is impossible to fully eradicate, especially given that the extent of citizenship varies
within Europe, dependent on state parameters.
Historians have criticised the ‘prudery’ of war, yet its awful nature can lead to some
reactionary reform concerning citizenship because of the need to combat wartime
conditions. Becker and Audoin-Rouzeau have stated that war is awful, lamentably lacking
4
Ibid.pg. 29.
M. Mazower, Dark Continent, Europe’s Twentieth Century, (London, 1998), pg. 174.
6
Ibid. pg. 246.
7
M. Davis, ‘Is Spain recovering its memory? Breaking the Pacto del Olvido’, in Human Rights Quarterly, 27 (3)
(2005), pg. 860.
5
3 Ben Hardy
connection with politics.8 They cite the example of Armenians, targeted and murdered by
Turkish authorities as a scapegoat for military defeat in World War I. Although I agree with
criticisms of war raised here, I disagree that politics is disconnected from war, since certain
nations have witnessed political transformation as a result of conflict. Indeed, the Labour
party emerged in post-war Britain as part of a transition to a welfare state, which
completely disassociated with the war years at the expense of the charismatic leader,
Winston Churchill. This development was by no means universal but it illustrated how
European nations were prepared to reconstruct and build a stable society, with concepts
such as citizenship being emphasised by the emergence of the National Health Service. The
Times reported on a decline in diphtheria deaths, comparing pre-war levels of 3,000 with
934 in 1944, an example of an immunization campaign portraying citizenship’s benefits.9
America in contrast did not generate a counterpart to the ‘see it through and vote Labour’
determination of Britain’s post-war community.10 Roosevelt committed to virtues of a free
society such as self-help and voluntarism, yet arguably America became embroiled in
distractions such as the Cold War which overshadowed these precepts.
It is paradoxical to suggest that war has been a catalyst for new ideas of citizenship
because clearly it is not a world situation that should be emulated. However, massive
catastrophes invariably raise global awareness. The rise of America correlated with
economic support of European nations as emphasised by the introduction of the Marshall
8
B. Davis, ‘Experience, identity and memory: The legacy of World War I’, in The Journal of Modern History, 75
(1) (2003), pg. 116.
9
‘Houses in Great Numbers’, The Times, 4 January 1946, pg. 4.
10
D. Showalter, ‘Global Yet Not Total, The U.S. War Effort and Its Consequences’, in R. Chickering (ed.), A
World At Total War, Global Conflict and the Politics of Destruction, (New York, 2005), pg. 128.
4 Ben Hardy
Plan and International Monetary Fund. Measures such as these enable peaceful cooperation
to be instigated, as well as improving living standards for citizens within more countries.
Economic growth organized by welfare capitalism gave rise to ‘politics of productivity’11 as
nations looked to move on from another global war by pooling resources together. Indeed,
the European Union and the Treaty establishing the European Coal and Steel Community,
brought countries such as France and Germany together. Therefore, a state of reconciliation
was possible even after continental wars. Only in peacetime could ideas of citizenship be
developed and implemented. However, this is not guaranteed as demonstrated by the end
of World War I. Hobsbawm argues that this conflict ‘solved nothing’ as ‘hopes of a peaceful
and democratic world of nation states under the League of Nations’, and a return to the
world economy of 1913, were ‘soon disappointed’,12 because of issues of revenge and
unstable economic conditions that gave rise to totalitarian regimes.
Involvement in war is not desired as shown by Utopian views of socialism within the
Soviet Union, which ironically exacerbated the world situation at the expense of citizenship.
War presents unstable conditions, and facilitated inequality. American social-welfare
consumption was ploughed back into private investment after 1945, enriching certain elitist
companies and individuals, against the aspirations that Marxists had proclaimed. 13In
contrast to affluent corporations, by July 1945, several million Germans had fled or been
expelled from their homes, whilst more than seven million refugees from other ethnic
11
C.S Maier, ‘The Two Postwar Eras and the Conditions for stability in Twentieth-Century Western Europe’, in
American Historical Review, 86 (2) (1981), pg. 345.
12
E. Hobsbawm, The Age of Extremes, pg. 52.
13
C.S Maier, ‘The Two Postwar Eras and the Conditions for stability in Twentieth-Century Western Europe’, pg.
347.
5 Ben Hardy
groups such as Poles and Ukrainians were also evicted and resettled in new homes.14 After
the global scale of the wars, guaranteeing universal citizenship was a tall order since many
were left wandering the continent in search of new lives after the obliteration of their
lifestyle. Europe’s diversity could not accommodate improved living standards for all,
especially given the collapse of states such as Yugoslavia. War is inherently unstable, and
rather than catalysing citizenship, is instead a ‘war of victims, not victors’ as stated by
Ziemann.15
Essentially, war is an issue that overwhelmingly destroys citizenship rather than being
a means of improving individual rights. Certain countries have raised awareness of
citizenship such as Spain in 2002 where congress approved a declaration condemning the
military coup of 1936 out of justice to those victims who were deprived of rights16.
Moreover, the era of the world wars coincided with a rise in universal suffrage as women
became more involved in the working world, a matter too vast for the constraints of this
essay. Yet Arendt and other historians are correct to focus on the ‘banality’ of war itself
since the cost of lives lost can easily outweigh any welfare reforms or commemorative acts,
especially for relatives of those killed. War is disastrous as described by Henry James when
outlining how he witnessed the ‘plunge of civilization into [an] abyss of blood and
darkness’17 during World War I. Citizenship is therefore a matter of compensation as
governments attempt to react to destructive and chaotic events, as part of efforts to
14
M. Mazower, Dark Continent, pg. 221.
B. Davis, ‘Experience, identity and memory: The legacy of World War I’, pg. 125.
16
G. Blakeley, ‘Digging up Spain’s past: Conquerors of truth and reconciliation’, in Democratization, 12 (1)
(2005), pg. 49.
17
O. Bartov, ‘Man and the Mass: Reality and the Heroic Image in War’, in History and Memory I, (2) (1989), pg.
110.
15
6 Ben Hardy
progress into a new post-war era. As the existence of the Cold war into the late twentieth
century shows, escaping the effects of war in favour of a peaceful society that can focus
entirely on citizenship, is a monumental task.