Richard A. Koenigsberg, whose essay is entitled “Warfare, Sacrificial Death and Memorialization” in its original version for an international audience at http://www.libraryofsocialscience.com/newsletter/posts/2015/2015-5-26-commemoration1.html — itself part of a Newsletter series, http://archive.benchmarkemail.com/Library-of-Social-Science
Wars are undertaken based on a structure of thought—a template enacted upon the stage of reality. In the first place—in order for a war to occur—there must be an “enemy:” a particular group or class of people imagined to be seeking to harm or to destroy one’s nation and its sacred values. Identification of this dangerous or threatening enemy generates the belief that it may be necessary to wage war—to defeat this enemy that threatens the existence of one’s nation.
Waging war requires engaging in battle, where some citizens may become casualties. Citizens who die in battle (often soldiers) are said to have made the “supreme sacrifice.” Their sacrificial death is conceived as a gift: they have given their lives to their country—so that the nation might live.
ANZAC Memorial, Hyde Park, Sydney
Subsequent to a war (or during it—as was the case in the First World War), a nation may create monuments—whose purpose is to preserve the memory of soldiers who have “given their lives” in the process of fighting for or defending the nation. Gravestones memorialize or symbolize the dead soldiers who have sacrificed their lives. Continue reading
