Sociology: Theories on War

War has existed from the moment man realized he could kill. Wars have been fought for a plethora of reasons:  from power and resources to women and honor to religion and ideology. It seems there is nothing worth attaining peace for - for every stride taken in the name of peace, there is a stride taken in the name of war, a rebuttal to that peace.

Scholars have long debated the rationals and reasons behind war, what facilitates it, what keeps it going, and what ends it. And there are varying theories that attempt to answer these questions that take into consideration, among other things, economics, governmental ideologies and systems, societal norms and mores, and individual and small group decisions. Therefore, governments and societies in general, are invested in the study of war as war serves two key roles: chief shaper and fundamental liquefier of states.

One theory posits that nation-states are fundamentally concerned with their own security. This theory implements an  "interstate/anarchic" system, one that pits each state against the other. Each state is subject to the unforeseeable actions of the states which border it and the desires and plans of the peoples within those states. Any thing could happen at any time. Security, this theory suggests, can only be maintained through military power, not diplomacy or any other action.

This "interstate/anarchic" theory does raise interesting and pertinent points and, as a theory, is logical. Yet, history does prove that military power is not the determining factor of security as diplomacy and other factors often way in when considering politics and inter-governmental structures. 


Leaders are often influenced by societal norms and mores within any particular nation-state. These held values and principles can negatively or positively affect the outcome of any political process. These stresses of what the populace expects weigh heavy, most of the time, on the minds of politicians, if for nothing more than chances at re-election. This thought stems from a theory which hypothesizes that bureaucratization is a chief factor in declaring war.

And many nations have fought wars that are not economically sound or what is best for national security, but over territory, religion and ideology. Sometimes, these choices are irrational, they are based on fear, hate, passion, and self-interest. Sometimes, these choices ignore best interests of the nation as a whole and executives and bureaucrats ( or in some cases the populace as a whole)  become temporarily blinded by short term aspirations.

The concerning factor is uncertainty. War breeds from uncertainty. War breeds from impatience. War breeds from constriction. 

For example, take the American Revolutionary War. Under constraints put on the colonies by the British monarchy and, to some extent, parliament, the thirteen colonies banded together in revolt. The sociological structure shifted from that of the controlled to that of the free (or less controlled as the fledgling government grew).

Uncertainty, as a cause of war, can be seen through the Holocaust. Before WWII, the German people were all ready on shaky ground with those of Jewish heritage and descent. But economic depression took hold in Germany and the socialist movement gained more and more support. The conditions grew ripe for the German people to act on their uncertainties, uncertainties that the Jews were the cause of all German problems.

Ideology leads to war. The spread of Communism throughout the world suring the 20th century can attest to this. Many nations, including the United States, were sucked into conflicts of ideology - East v. West, Capitalism v. Communism, containment. And here, war needen't be categorized as open conflict: the Cold War, although, as the name implies, one of no open militarisitc agression, was still a war. It was simlpy a war of ideology and social constructs.


But a steadfast, concrete theory of war will forever be elusive. The factors that lie behind the armed conflicts around the globe are far too intricate to boil down to one cohesive theory. War is erratic, unpredictable. It is the one societal occurrence that is the most terrifying. War is not isolated - whole societies become involved or don't. There is no picking and choosing.