実は戦争が平等な社会をつくってきた？歴史的な考察！
勘違いされたくないが、私は戦争は嫌いだ。戦争で人の命が失われるのは悲しい。しかし、だからといって、戦争を考察することをやめるのも良くないと考えている。実際に起こってしまっている以上は、考察し、どうすれば防げるのか考えたり、何らかの社会的意義はあるだろう。
私の仮説だが、戦争が平等な社会をつくったのではないか、というものがある。それを紹介したい。
古代ギリシャの事例
古代ギリシャにおいては、貴族が戦士として戦争に参加していた。しかし、アケメネス朝ペルシアとの戦争では、貴族階級だけでは戦力不足であり、下級市民も軍艦の漕ぎ手などとして活躍し、選挙権を得たと考えている。
中世〜近世日本の事例
平氏は、桓武天皇の血筋をひきながらも、下級貴族に甘んじていた。しかし、日宋貿易や、数々の戦いでの軍功が認められて、貴族として上位にのぼりつめた。平氏は、武士と思われることが多いが、実は朝廷においても高い暗いを得て、貴族としても活躍していた。戦国時代は、農民であっても武器をとることが許されており、武勲次第では出世することが可能だった。豊臣秀吉がその典型である。
総力戦
近代の総力戦の原型は、フランス革命の頃であると思われる。この頃、フランスでは徴兵制が始まり、他国のプロの常備軍を兵力で圧倒した。そして同時に、男性に限定されるものの、選挙権が拡大された。それはプロイセンやイギリス、アメリカなど、他国にも広がった。
第二次世界大戦
これが最大のインパクトがあった。第二次世界大戦は、世界で多くの人の命が失われた。また、多くの人の財産が破壊された。そもそも、ドイツでは、貧しい人が増えて、その人たちの不満がナチスを生み、戦争のきっかけとなった。日本では戦後、GHQの指導で、財閥が解体されて、戦前の日本経済を牛耳っていた三井・三菱・住友などの影響力は限定的なものとなった。また、これは当時のアメリカ民主党の価値観がかなり左派リベラルに寄っていたためであるが、華族などの身分制度や豪農の土地支配も解体された。
※韓国においては財閥は存続しており、というよりむしろ政府が財閥にリソースを集中したため、一部の巨大企業ばかり利益をあげて、日本と比較して中小企業が少ないというデータがある。
・・・こんなことは書きたくないが、東京や大阪の大空襲で、一度、東京と大阪がリセットされたことは大きい。華族や財閥幹部の豪邸は破壊された。その後、日本経済は高度経済成長に突入し、一億総中流と呼ばれるほど、平等な社会となった。しかし、最近はまた、格差が拡大・再生産されてきている。
AIに教えてもらったが、ウォルター・シャイデルという歴史家も、著書『暴力と不平等の人類史』において詳しく展開している。私もいつか読んでみたい。以下のリンクも参考になる。
English essay by AI
The Relationship Between War and Inequality: A Historical Perspective
War has often been a catalyst for profound social change, influencing the dynamics of inequality within societies. While the immediate consequences of war are often tragic, including loss of life and destruction, historical evidence suggests that wars can also lead to increased social equality and mobility. This essay explores the mechanisms by which war can promote equality, drawing on historical examples from ancient Greece, medieval to early modern Japan, modern total war, and the aftermath of World War II, while also addressing counterarguments and considering different types of conflict.
### Ancient Greece: The Rise of Citizen Rights
In ancient Greece, particularly during the Persian Wars, the participation of lower-class citizens in warfare led to significant social changes. Traditionally, military service was the domain of the aristocracy; however, as the need for manpower grew, lower-class citizens were called upon to serve as hoplites (heavily armed foot soldiers). This shift not only allowed these individuals to gain military honor but also facilitated their access to political rights, including voting. The war effort fostered a sense of unity among citizens and contributed to the development of democratic principles in city-states like Athens. Thus, war acted as a mechanism for broadening the base of political participation and reducing class-based inequalities.
### Medieval to Early Modern Japan: Social Mobility Through Conflict
In Japan, the period of civil strife known as the Sengoku period (1467-1603) saw significant changes in social hierarchy due to warfare. The rise of the samurai class allowed for individuals from lower social strata to ascend through military achievement. Figures such as Toyotomi Hideyoshi exemplified this phenomenon; he rose from peasant origins to become a powerful daimyo through his military exploits. The conflict created opportunities for social mobility that were previously unavailable in a rigid class system. As a result, warfare contributed to a more fluid social structure where merit could outweigh birthright.
### Modern Total War: The Impact of Conscription
The concept of total war emerged prominently during the French Revolution and was characterized by the mobilization of entire nations for war efforts. The introduction of conscription (the draft) meant that all able-bodied men were required to serve in the military, regardless of their social class. This not only fostered a sense of national identity but also led to demands for broader political rights. In France, this culminated in the expansion of suffrage and increased political participation among common citizens. The spread of these ideas across Europe demonstrated how wartime mobilization could challenge existing power structures and promote greater equality.
### World War II: A Catalyst for Social Change
The aftermath of World War II brought about significant transformations in Japan and many other countries. In Japan, the Allied occupation led by General Douglas MacArthur resulted in extensive reforms aimed at dismantling feudal structures and promoting economic equality. The dissolution of zaibatsu (large family-owned conglomerates) and land reforms reduced economic disparities and laid the groundwork for what would become an era of rapid economic growth known as the "Japanese Economic Miracle." This period saw the emergence of a more egalitarian society characterized by widespread access to education and improved living standards.
### Counterarguments: The Dark Side of War
While it is evident that war can promote social equality through various mechanisms, it is essential to recognize that it can also exacerbate existing inequalities or create new ones. For instance, post-war reconstruction efforts may favor certain groups over others, leading to disparities in wealth and opportunity. Additionally, civil wars often deepen societal divisions rather than resolve them, as seen in countries like Syria or Somalia where conflict has entrenched inequalities based on ethnicity or class.
### Differentiating Types of War
The impact of war on inequality can vary significantly depending on its nature. Civil wars may lead to heightened tensions and divisions within society, while interstate wars might foster a sense of national unity that transcends class lines. Wars of independence can empower marginalized groups but may also result in new forms of oppression if power dynamics shift without addressing underlying inequalities.
### Conclusion: A Complex Relationship
In conclusion, while war has historically contributed to increased social equality through mechanisms such as social mobility, political participation, and economic reform, it is essential to acknowledge that these changes often come at a tremendous human cost. The relationship between war and inequality is complex; while wars can disrupt existing hierarchies and create opportunities for marginalized groups, they also entail significant suffering and loss. Understanding this relationship requires a nuanced perspective that considers both the destructive nature of conflict and its potential to reshape societies toward greater equality.
---
This revised essay incorporates deeper analysis of counterarguments and different types of conflict while maintaining clarity and organization. It also emphasizes the complexity surrounding the relationship between war and inequality. Thank you again for your valuable insights!