Extremism and Confusion in American Views about the Ethics of War

In their article “Just War and Unjust Soldiers: American Public Opinion on the Moral Equality of Combatants,” Scott Sagan and Benjamin Valentino have revealed a wealth of information about the views of contemporary Americans on the ethics of war. Virtually all they have discovered is surprising and much of it is alarming. My commentary in this symposium seeks mainly to extract a bit more from their data and to draw a few further inferences. Among the striking features of Sagan and Valentino's data are that the views of Americans tend to cluster at the extreme ends of the spectrum of possible views about the ethics of war, that an apparent sympathy for pacifism coexists with harshly punitive views about the treatment of soldiers, and that few of those surveyed appear to have given any thought to the implications of the views they expressed for what it might be permissible for enemies of the United States to do to captured American soldiers. The commentary concludes by arguing that Sagan and Valentino's findings do not, as they argue, support the fear that is sometimes expressed that a wider acceptance of revisionist just war theory, and in particular its incorporation into the law, would make the practice of war even more barbarous than it already is

Confusion · Criminology · Just war theory · Political science · Politics · Psychoanalysis · Public opinion · Sociology · Spanish Civil War · Sympathy · Global Peace and Security Dynamics · Law · Psychology · Social Psychology · Torture, Ethics, and Law · War, Ethics, and Justification

• Ethical counterinsurgency, and the reciprocal nature of strategic ethics

  Philip Mayne, David J Lonsdale•Small Wars and Insurgencies•2025

  Add to list

• Vicarious Retribution

  Open Access•Brian Lickel, Norman Miller et al.•Personality and Social Psychology…•2006

  Add to list