Wars Against Ideologies

[Zeichen]

I was discussing a matter with a Ron Paul supporter on a different website. He maintained that ideologies could not be defeated without an endless, impossible genocide against all who shared the beliefs of said ideology. I tried to reason with him, give historical examples, explain military strategies, but couldn't get through to him.

So, he suggested I come here and discuss this with you all. I suppose first of all I'll ask the simple basic question, to see if we even disagree.

Can ideologies be defeated militarily, or through a combination of coercive measures?

 

[OptionsTrader]

If it is desired to change the ideology of a person, persuasion is the moral method. Military force to coerce belief in an ideology is completely unjustifiable, not to mention extremely fucking expensive.

 

[Zeichen]

I was talking about feasibility, not morality or cost-effectiveness.

 

[pinkmandy]

I don't think they can. Education/brainwashing/propaganda is the way to beat an ideology. With force you will always have martyrs.

 

[Zeichen]

Okay then.

How about the historical cases in which ideologies have been defeated? One case that immediately comes to mind is militant Communism, which was clearly defeated.

 

[asgardshill]

I was talking about feasibility, not morality or cost-effectiveness.

Its not at all feasible - no one can kill an idea. People don't and won't change their minds at gunpoint. And if you kill them, others will take their place and hate you for your methods, and are completely correct in doing so.

The modern-day Machiavelli has three choices:

1) Kill everybody with the "bad" idealogy then keep killing, lather rinse repeat, until nobody admits to having the "bad" idealogy any more. Not really feasible because people lie and six billion bullets are expensive.

2) Persuade those with the "bad" idealogy that their idealogy is truly bad and that they should change it themselves. A better solution and much less costly.

3) Change YOUR idealogy to more closely match the "bad" idealogy. This is what usually ends up happening.

 

[Zeichen]

You cannot destroy an idea. However, you can destroy the organizations and groups which attempts to implement that idea. Destroy the means for the ideology to launch offensive assaults, disrupt their supplies, dampen morale, eliminate leadership.

You can make the fact that people still believe in said ideology irrelevant, since they cannot act militarily on said desires.

 

[soapmistress]

Militant communism was clearly defeated???

 

[Zeichen]

The remaining communist nations after the Soviet Union fell were isolationistic and not bent on a "global revolution". They were merely groups of people intent of retaining authority in their own countries.

 

[Truth Warrior]

I was discussing a matter with a Ron Paul supporter on a different website. He maintained that ideologies could not be defeated without an endless, impossible genocide against all who shared the beliefs of said ideology. I tried to reason with him, give historical examples, explain military strategies, but couldn't get through to him.

So, he suggested I come here and discuss this with you all. I suppose first of all I'll ask the simple basic question, to see if we even disagree.

Can ideologies be defeated militarily, or through a combination of coercive measures?

Perhaps all but the statism ideology. You can't shoot a truth.

 

[AmericaFyeah92]

read the last third of 1984 (winston in the ministry of love) if you want to know how to completely revamp someones mind

i have no doubt people can be convinced that 2+2=5 if you work on them long enough

 

[mediahasyou]

If it is desired to change the ideology of a person, persuasion is the moral method. Military force to coerce belief in an ideology is completely unjustifiable, not to mention extremely fucking expensive.

honors.

 

[Zeichen]

I have read 1984, discussed it with my comparative politics teacher, analyzed the book extensively, and written a paper on it. I know the content and message.

Anyways... You all don't seem to be completely understanding the point of this thread. My apologies if I was not clear in the OP.

I am NOT asking, "Is it possible to eradicate all belief in an ideology?" I am asking, "Is it possible to so cripple an ideology that it can no longer be a danger?" Not eradicate, but defeat.

 

[driller80545]

The only way to defeat an ideology is to kill everyone with the idea. Rather harsh. And where has there ever been a military defeat of communism. I can't recall a single instance. A few real stretches, some wishful thinking, but no real instance of military defeat.

 

[Zeichen]

That's what I'm saying though. As I stated in the OP, a mixture of coercive measures were used to render the militant communist ideology ineffective. We did not have to kill every ideologue, merely erode their means of continuing the conflict.

And I suppose I ought to ask this as well. What is an ideology? I know the political science definition, but would be interested in what you all think.

 

[driller80545]

That's what I'm saying though. As I stated in the OP, a mixture of coercive measures were used to render the militant communist ideology ineffective. We did not have to kill every ideologue, merely erode their means of continuing the conflict.

And I suppose I ought to ask this as well. What is an ideology? I know the political science definition, but would be interested in what you all think.

I suppose that you are referring to the Russian defeat in Afghanistan. I suppose that, with our help, the "militant communist ideology" was rendered ineffective. I really don't believe that the ideology was affected as much as the Russian's ability to finance war. I propose that the ideology is still in place and in recovery.

I would also submit that we are targets for the same defeat. Our ability to finance war is becoming desperate.

 

[yongrel]

Only if you kill every idealist.

 

[Zeichen]

I suppose that you are referring to the Russian defeat in Afghanistan. I suppose that, with our help, the "militant communist ideology" was rendered ineffective. I really don't believe that the ideology was affected as much as the Russian's ability to finance war. I propose that the ideology is still in place and in recovery.

I would also submit that we are targets for the same defeat. Our ability to finance war is becoming desperate.

That was the entire basis of Reagan's buildup. He challenged the Soviets on every front, and forced them into an arms race. Our economy was far superior, so that bankrupted the Soviet Union while hardly affecting us. That was one of the coercive measures I referred to.

If I go and give a list of cases in which ideologies have been defeated, would you all admit it is possible? And you all have still not identified what you claim an ideology is.

 

[driller80545]

Ideology: core of ideas that identify a culture. Political creed. Simplified.

It was not Reagan who stood and fought the Russians. The arms race had been going on since WWII. It was the CIA and Afghanistan that bankrupted the Soviets, although trying to keep up with our proliferation of arms surely played a part, too.

Why would you be interested in destroying a cultures ideologies. Isn't that a bit heavy handed and disrespectful. Wouldn't we all be better served to study other ideologies to see if there is not something to be learned from them? Why so militant?
I would think that having a goal of destroying ideologies different from your own to be narrow minded and paranoid. I suppose that other cultures can be destroyed and have been in the past, but sounds awfully barbaric to me.

 

[Zeichen]

Er, in the sixties we had detente, and in the 70s Carter. It WAS Reagan in the 80s who engineered the massive arms race which bankrupted the Soviet Union.

Of course the ideology intended to be defeated (NOT destroyed) is not national culture. It is the political and jingoistic sections that deserve countering.

And, why is it that I answer all the questions addressed to me, but you all do not answer questions I address to you? I honestly would be interested in the responses.