2006/03/30 by Hew Strachan · 1 voice · 1 citation
Social Sciences · Arts and Humanities · #Military History and Strategy #War, Ethics, and Justification #World Wars: History, Literature, and Impact
paper · doi:10.1177/0022009406062054
openalex publication_date 2006/03/30 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/05/21
Since 1945, theories of combat motivation have been shaped primarily by the argument that soldiers fight for their comrades. This emphasis on the primary group, advanced particularly by Americans, has been challenged from two directions. First, those who point to the heavy losses sustained in fighting on fronts such as the Russian in the second world war argue that ideology or ‘legitimate demand’ must play a role. Second, evidence from both world wars suggests that disciplinary systems also need to be taken into account. This article seeks to incorporate a fourth explanation, the function of realistic training, a point made by one of the most important post-1945 American books on combat motivation, S.L.A. Marshall’s Men Against Fire, but subsequently overlooked.