God and Religion are the Reasons Used by Many politicians as a Motivation for War

Name:
Institutional Affiliation
Course Title
Instructor
Date:
God and Religion are the Reasons Used by Many politicians as a Motivation for War
Introduction
The history of God and war is as long as humankind itself. From the times of the Old Testament when Prophet Elijah challenged Baal prophet is in a contest at Mt. Carmel through to the 30 years’ war and the crusades of the medieval times, God and religion have always been associated with war objectives. More recently, during the wars of the imperialist era, and World War, “God’s will” was used as a major driving factor for the wars. Various politicians such as Albert Beveridge used the idea of “it is God’s will” to manipulate the US Senate and the rest of America into embracing the idea of an American Empire by taking full control of the Philippines.
Similarly, in a 1950 speech, “Enemies from Within”, delivered in Wheeling, West Virginia, Senator Joseph McCarthy also alluded to the will of God, as the reason Americans should be the leaders of the war during the beginnings of the Cold War In a hilarious analysis of The Ten Commandments, George Carnie to a round of applause said “More people have been killed in the name of God than for any other reason.” Richard Dawkins has put it this way: “Religion causes war by generating certainty” (Martin 22). God and religion gave on many occasions been used as a driving factor to motivate people into war. Although to motivate people into war, hide behind the claim that it is to serve God’s purpose, I do not think this is true; I think most are simply serving their interests and implicating God and religion. This paper assesses various instances in which God and religion have been implicated as a driving factor to motivate war.
Senator Beveridge’s Speech during the Imperial Wars of the Philippines
In his 1900 speech, addressing the US Senate on the ongoing debate on whether the US should exercise imperial control over the Philippines, Senator Albert Beveridge (1862-1927) strongly urged the Senate and the rest of the government to embrace imperialism. According to Beveridge, it was their mission as a race, entrusted by God to spread civilization throughout the world and creating an American Empire was in line with that process. Beveridge asserts, “He has marked us as His chosen people, henceforth to lead in the regeneration of the world. In Beveridge’s view, spreading civilization as tasked by God was supposed to be America’s sole mission, regardless of the means used to achieve this (Lundblade 2).
About the Filipino’s, Beveridge refers to them as a barbaric race, that has been influenced by the three centuries they had been in contact to a decadent race, about the Spanish. He says the Filipinos had lived through three hundred years of superstition in religion, dishonesty in their deals and disorderly habits. He, therefore, concludes that the Filipino is incapable of self-governance in his attempt to justify imperialism. With these, Beveridge goes on to urge the US President that delaying the war will only prolong it, as it was an inevitable one in his view (Braeman 355).
In his conclusion, Beveridge asserts that the question of imperialism is deeper than any question of state policy, constitutional power, or party politics. He argues that it is a question of a chosen race. According to Beveridge, “God has not been preparing the English-speaking and Teutonic peoples for a thousand years for nothing but vain and idle self-contemplation and self-admiration. No! He has made us the master organizers of the world to establish a system where chaos reigns. He has given us the spirit of progress to overwhelm the forces of reaction throughout the earth. He has made us adept in government that we may administer government among savage and senile peoples (Stathis 238).”
Beveridge continues to argue that without the supreme power that is God, the whole world would deteriorate into barbarism and darkness. He then asserts that God has chosen the American people like the people that will lead the rebirth of the world. He sees this as the divine mission of the American people and one, which promises profits, glory, and happiness to the whole world. Beveridge then concluded his speech with religious rhetoric “Ye have been faithful over a few things; I will make you rule over many things.” (Dirlik 225)
Senator McCarthy’s Speech in the Beginnings of the Cold War
Similar to Beveridge, in 1950, during the beginnings of the World War II, Senator Joseph McCarthy delivered a speech titled “Enemies from Within” in Wheeling, West Virginia. The speech was majorly about communist atheists within the American Christian leadership. McCarthy warns that although the world war was over, it was only the beginning of a new one, a war of religions between communists and Christians (Rovere 42). To prove that the war is impending, McCarthy, quotes the then communist leader as saying "To think that the communist revolution can be carried out peacefully, within the framework of a Christian democracy, means one has either gone out of one's mind and lost all normal understanding, or has grossly and openly repudiated the communist revolution", two years after the war (Schwartz 428). This is the basis on which McCarthy builds his argument that the communists need to be stopped (Rovere 41).
In his speech, McCarthy also quoted Lenin, another communist leader in a statement that was later confirmed by Stalin. Lenin hinted that the current system in which the communist Soviet Republic lived side by side with predominantly Christian states was unthinkable and could not be trusted to last for long (Rovere 194). According to Lenin, a war between the two was inevitable, so that one could crumble and the other would be left to flourish. Just like other leaders, Lenin is using religion as an excuse to wage war on Americans for their Christian beliefs.
McCarthy also cites an incident where the State Department had placed a man named John S. Service in China when Chiang Kai-Shek was fighting the American war, for Christianity. According to McCarthy, Service sent back official reports urging America torpedo Chiang Kai-Shek. He reasoned that communism was the only viable option for the Chinese and the only solution according to Service was to torpedo Chiang Kai Shek who was supporting Christians (Rovere 32).
When renowned political theorist Leo Strauss introduced the topics of religion and politics in his reflections, he presented it as a problem, which he named the theological-political problem (Meier 128). According to Strauss, the problem is majorly about authority: should political authority be grounded in the patents of revelation or reason, Jerusalem or Athens? Strauss’s characterization of political authority leaves much food for thought as he gives insights into the political reflection in the west, specifically about the nature degree and validation of political authority. Do kingdoms get their authority from a divine right? Has God given secular rulers like kings the power to wage war with religious objectives in mind? Do rulers have any authority to suppress nonconformists? What is the authority of a state when its operational principles do not agree with God’s? These and many others are some of the questions that have plagued numerous medieval and contemporary philosophers.
The utterance...