Man's bloody history is not due to aggressive instincts. Most men are dragged into battle because they are too cowardly, foolish, and herdlike to resist. They are not impelled by blood lust. They are driven by fear of disobeying their rulers and by a misguided sense of duty.
The great majority of the soldiers who do the killing and dying are not naturally aggressive. They simply follow orders blindly, stupidly, loyally, unselfishly, and, above all, fearfully.
If men were more self-assertive, they would not submit to the marching orders of their leaders. If the masses were aggressive, quick tempered, and anxious to defend their interests, they wouldn't submit to the will of any ruler. They would insist on ruling themselves.
The fact that mankind has been led into war after war does not support the theory that man is aggressive. It shows that man's social instincts are stronger than his ability to reason.
If soldiers were assertive enough and smart enough to think for themselves, many of them wouldn't submit to the commands of dictators and generals. War is made possible by misplaced loyalties and misdirected social instincts.
An army requires its soldiers to be obedient, to conform to military standards, to give up much of their individuality, and to be self-sacrificing. Except for its purpose, an army is a model of altruistic cooperation. If war depended on the aggressive instincts of the masses, there would be no wars.
The minority of men who are aggressive tend to become the leaders. Being aggressive, the leaders want to expand their control or, at least, defend what they already control. This causes conflicts between the ruling classes in different countries.
They settle these conflicts by having their respective subordinates fight wars. The men who do the actual fighting are about as naturally aggressive as sheep. They simply do what their leaders order them to do. If the leaders did not tell them whom to fight, they wouldn't fight anybody.
Wars are not waged because people are cruel or because men have an aggressive instinct. Wars are made possible because men are so loyal, compliant, patriotic, and herdlike that their government can easily dupe them into rallying around its battle flag whenever it wants them to.
A man who is decent and sees the world the way it is, may love the culture, the landscape, the people, or the history of his homeland, but he cannot love the state that governs it. He does not confuse the state with his country. Unfortunately, such individuals are a small minority. Most people do confuse their government with their homeland. This misplaced patriotism is the state's greatest strength.
The state uses patriotism to increase its control over its subjects. Nothing brings out patriotism as much as a national emergency. If nature fails to provide a disaster, the state may manufacture one.
The public is gullible enough to fall for almost any fabricated threat that their leaders choose to scare them with—from the yellow peril to the red menace, from cheap Japanese imports to expensive imports from OPEC countries, from the dangers of private handguns to the danger of a missile gap.
