Advanced Essay #4: Repercussions of War on Society


The goals of this paper were to investigate how war impacts and leaves an imprint on people in communities. I also go into how these impacts can be beneficial to the people or how the system can advance or deteriorate because of these changes. My process was overall productive and I was able to use my time wisely and efficiently. When reviewing my final product, I was overall satisfied with the paper and how my goals were accomplished.


While war and violence may seem like an easy thing to define and understand, it actually is a lot more complex than what first meets the eye. War and violence is not only a physical being in the moment, but it also has a mental effect during and after the circumstances. One of these mental effects is how war has affected the home country (or countries) during and after the bloody battles. War always imprints on the societies that were involved for better or for worse.

One effect that Karl Marlantes points out is that our mentality as a people changes towards the government after a war. To provide more context, Marlantes wrote about the specific aftereffects of the Vietnam War. He writes “We have switched from naïveté to cynicism. One could argue that they are opposites, but I think not. With naïveté you risk disillusionment, which is what happened to me and many of my generation. Cynicism, however, stops you before you start. It alienates us from ‘the government,’ a phrase that today connotes bureaucratic quagmire. It threatens democracy, because it destroys the power of the people to even want to make change.” This quote not only shows how the people have evolved their views on the government and war, but how it has improved. This can also show how people learn from immediate history and how this imprint from war causes changes throughout history.

Another way war has affected the mass afterwards was the opinion of the public of war efforts. Karl Marlantes also writes “For many people, it eroded the notion, once nearly universal, that part of being an American was serving your country.” It can be seen here that people further experience that cynicism Marlantes refers to earlier. War doesn’t actually solve a lot of issues. The people learn this concept because of their desire to change the ideals of war and violent conflict. The idea of what it means to be an American in relation to war has led to numerous debates and differing opinions.

Furthering this notion of being American and not wanting to serve, there are in fact a lot of different instances where some do not have a choice to be called back into the military. This also causes a lot of issues of dividing the people and the nation. Rita Nakashima Brock writes “Forcing people to stay in service means the military abrogated their contracts and made the question of whether or not they volunteered moot.” This means that there is no choice involved when the military always has the option to reenlist a person back into active service. Even if a person has grown and took things out of war and are against it (no matter if they volunteered the first time or not), they can be forced back into it, disregarding their morals and beliefs in the present. So sometimes even when a people have evolved opinions based on past events, the system doesn’t have to follow those opinions in the same time or even ever.

In conclusion, war leaves an after effect on the communities involved that can impact how that community grows in the future. Sometimes people can become more aware of the violence happening around them. And sometimes the system refuses to change because it it more “beneficial” to them.

Works Cited:

Marlantes, Karl. "Vietnam: The War That Killed Trust." The New York Times. The New

York Times, 07 Jan. 2017. Web. 13 Mar. 2017. < >.  

Rita Nakashima Brock. "Just War Theory: Are We Protecting the Moral Conscience of

Soldiers?" The Huffington Post., 14 Oct. 2010. Web. 14 Mar. 2017.<>.