War: Should Government Seek The Citizen's Approval?
“Everything you do in war is a crime in peace.” – Helen McCloy (Writer, 1904 – 1994, USA)
Every government claims the decision they make for war is often for the peace and interest of its citizens. But on a deeper look, one would realize that wars are fought for the interest of those in power. While they hide under the illusion of peace, Helen McCloy says everything you do, whether good or bad in war, is a crime to peace. Which means, war doesn't bring peace, rather it hinders peace from abiding.
If it was truly for the interest of the citizen, then should the government seek approval from its citizen before starting a war? I would say yes. Seeking approval means; the government would state the issue on ground, the reason why the fight is necessary, the disadvantages and advantages of fighting, and what they stand to gain in the future as a result of the war. When a poll is opened, whatever is decided by the citizens stands.
Image generated using Gemini AI
Why is this important?, most often in wars, it's the young ones who are killed and families displaced homeless. If the citizens are involved in the decision making, whatever consequences that result from the war is justified as a decision they chose. The blame no longer falls on the government but the people and the people may likely bear the loss with no regrets knowing exactly what they're fighting to gain.
However, I doubt if citizens would vote in favor of a war. People who have seen war know the impact and a lot of people have the same perspective as Helen McCloy, that war doesn't bring peace, rather it's a crime to peace. And just like Erasmus of Rotterdam would say“War is sweet to those who haven’t tasted it.”
Estoy de acuerdo con que la gente votaría habitualmente en contra de una guerra. No obstante, el problema es más complejo que el de votar o no. ¿Tiene sentido un referendum cuando ya estas siendo invadido como ocurrió con Ucrania? ¿Tiene sentido el referendum cuando estan matando a tu familia o destruyendo tu país? Uno podría votar si el problema fuera invadir otro país, pero no tiene muchas opciones cuando se trata de ser el invadido. También esta el hecho, de que los politicos nunca aprobarían una ley que les quite el poder de destruir las vidas de otros.
"En la guerra todo vale" mientras uno ha sido invadido, no queda más remedio que contraatacar. El referéndum solo procede del agresor, no del acusado.
That's a really good point. And most of the time they use the resources they "won" to their own advantage and, as you said, citizens are the ones that suffer all the consequences from wars