Why Men Fight

For too long, military historians have attempted to adhere to Clausewitzs description of war as merely politics by other means--by which he meant the high politics of kings and ministers. To this they have added the primary units and nationalism as tools for leaders to manipulate common soldiers. But a new generation of professionals is supplementing this view, pointing to race, ideology, morality, discipline, and even sexuality as sources of motivation. Borrowing new social and cultural historical methodologies, three young scholars in particular offer strikingly innovative and telling interpretations of what bonds people in combat. Where some see the fog, they see the sinews of war, as they move the study of war beyond narratives of winning and losing. Profs Leonard Smith Oberlin College, Craig Cameron Old Dominion University, and Omer Bartov Rutgers University have recently published studies of one to three divisions that afford important insights into what holds armies together and drives them forward.