The two world wars played a vital role in transforming different states’ socio-cultural, economic, and political domains. One of the key factors contributing to the significant impact from the wrangles involved the media’s role in promoting distinct propaganda. The industry focused on monetizing news to acquire market and attain relevance (Lecture Notes, n.d “Propaganda and war”). In this case, the news agencies aptly violated the journalism spectrum’s ethos, pathos, and logos ideologies. An excellent example encompassed the lack of advocating for peaceful agreements among states and encouraging youths to enrol in the army to boost defence. The ethical obligation among the professionals enshrines promoting socialization and international relations based on the relayed insights. The press’s mandate is to advocate for harmonized and sustainable living under the spectrum of propagandas despite divergent opinions.
The news agency utilizes different forms of advertising and relaying information to the public. A significant percentage of journalists focus on outlets that render a significant number of audiences for marketability. In this case, researchers establish that one of the factors attributed to intensified war among nations entailed the essence of capitalism (Lecture Notes, n.d “Propaganda”). The key stakeholders in the industry prioritized profit maximization, hence amplifying the benefits of winning the war while minimally addressing the repercussions of the violence to the international community. Below is a poster from the American press enticing youths to join the army for the world wars.
War is an event that poses significant repercussions to the participants and non-partisans due to the optimal destruction. Different societies uphold distinct socio-cultural, economic, and political overviews concerning governance and relationship-building inbound and outbound. Human behavior mainly depends on the rules within a region. An excellent example of an outcome due to the conflict of interests is the emergence of the Great War, also known as World War I. The combat attributed to a profound loss of lives and the wreckage of costly properties. The survivors encountered prominent health effect due to the horrific experiences and existing wrangles. The lack of agreement among nations risks confrontations that significantly affect residents due to the displacement from their settlements, rise in insecurity, and loss of relatives (Hall and Ross, 2019 p.1357). Primarily, the psychological consequence among people after World War I encompassed the survivor’s guilt and post-traumatic stress disorder.
One of the factors that led to World War I encompassed the influence of industrialization on the European and American nations. In this case, leaders rendered the initiative to utilize effective and highly graded tools for bombing, shooting, and facilitating counterattacks against enemies. During World War I, the U.S cooperated with the French armies to fight against the Germans in Arbonne (Cooper, 2021). Although the unity fostered the increase in the number of battalions, it is a situation that caused the loss of a significant number of soldiers due to the lack of strategies for attacks and counterattacks. Although weaponization empowered the armies with an additional support system, the issue lay in the traumatic experiences of hunger, thirst, and loss of colleagues.
The emergence of the two world wars is a phenomenon that led to a significant loss of lives and property globally due to the disparities in significant ideologies. During the industrialization era, the European nations attained profound developmental initiatives such as technological advancement (Lecture Notes, n.d “Psychology of influence”). It is a condition that cultivated tension across nations due to the differences in achievements and power status. An excellent example of the impact of modernization is the essence of imperialism and alliance justified by militarism. The short-term and long-term cause of the battles is a consequence of the notable blooming hence nations focused on establishing their worldwide position.
One of the significant differences between the two world wars is the immediate effect of the conflicts. At the onset of the first war, there was tension among nations; Archduke Franz Ferdinand’s assassination who was the heir to the Austro-Hungarian leadership was murdered by a Serbian nationalist known as Gavrilo Princip (Bouza et al., 2018). The two countries were rivals; therefore, killing an influential personality in one of the parties triggered the clash. The provocation of the second military confrontation engulfed the disagreements and arrogance between the American and Japanese governments. The U.S administration received news of Nanjing’s rape and the Manchurian crisis that led to its decision to establish sanctions against Japan. These bans included the exportation of oil, iron, and essential supplies. It is an initiative that significantly affected the economic growth in Japan hence the promptness to foster an attack at Pearl Harbor hence triggering the tussle. Therefore, while incite for the first strife was political, the spark for the second battle was socio-economically motivated.
In a different spectrum, industrialization rendered the profound technological advancements that empowered key European nations with lethal weapons for war. While states focused on enhancing economic growth and development, they aligned the initiatives to boost martial power. The striving to attain military dominance based on armament led to a distinct margin among governments, mainly under the U.S and Japan alliances spectrum (Ahrenfeldt, 2018). On the one hand, the measure in the firearms’ strength geared the conflicts in the First World War. On the other hand, the workforce and resistance fostered the end of the second tussle.
The first and second world wars emanated from similar long-term causes that encapsulated the effect of industrialization on the global territories. Technological advancement is an entity that empowered countries and the necessity to test the limits of power dynamism internationally. In this case, America and other European states focused on competing for recognition and martial dominance, a concept that enhanced the tension among rivalries (Bouza et al., 2018). As a result, societies with similar philosophies formed alliances to establish an influential baseline while the margin intensified. The significant frameworks spearheaded the conflicts, and the motivation involved imperialism, nationalism, and militarism.
The world wars fostered imminent negative effects on the psychological status between people. On the one hand, the long-term triggers of the confrontations involved nationalism, imperialism, industrialization, and militarism. On the other hand, different short-term factors led to the emergence of tussles. While the incitement for the first combat was politically inclined, the instigation for the second clash was socio-economically motivated (Ahrenfldt, 2018). The evolution of global society rendered a significant imbalance among communities to determine the power position globally.
Although different factors triggered the emergence of the conflicts, the core attribute engulfed the intensified tension across rivalry countries in the first World War. The nations at war enshrined Austria-Hungary, Ottoman Empire, and Germany against Japan, Italy, France, Great Britain, the United States, Russia, and Romania. The alliances significantly influenced the mental perception concerning relationship-building across the distinctive states (Bouza et al., 2018). The phenomenon prominently affected the residents’ psychological condition that trickled down to the marginalization of communities regarding the freedom of expression and movement internationally. World War I sparked enmity across the nations and negatively affected economic growth and development. According to historical records, Germany set off the battle by coordinating attacks in Marne, causing a profound negative effect on the populace (Hall and Ross, 2019). The psychological effect enshrined the necessity of establishing dominance across the regions, a factor that negatively attributed to World War II.
A different psychological consequence that significantly influenced the nations in World War I included post-traumatic stress disorder, hunger, and grief. These factors featured the rise of Russia’s ideological perspective about communism to intensify the influential baseline internationally. The central economic policy that contributed to the significant growth index in the U.S is capitalism. The approach enshrines the personal ownership of property and wealth hence imposing the importance of business competition for optimal profitability margin. The concept rendered a proficient effect to the marginalization of poor communities from the elite social group. However, the American government encountered the challenge after the First World War due to the philosophy. The core reason for the problem involved the demand for togetherness and cooperation between all stakeholders in rebuilding the country for better living conditions (Bouza et al., 2018). The aftermath of World War I attributed to the justification of communism and the spread across the highly affected nations globally and a trickle-down effect to the U.S.
Stalin is considered one of the historic mass murderers due to his policies implemented in Russia. The leader considered the ultimate solution of resistance as terror. The first approach to promote development engulfed the exploitation of collectivism among the small farmers. Although the agricultural worker fostered optimal produce, Stalin imposed socialism to elevate productivity among the kulak (Hall and Ross, 2019). Nevertheless, the statesman geared violence among the peasants to agree and amalgamate farmlands. The use of intimidation and fear is a high cost that led to the loss of Russian lives to enhance economic development and supremacy on a global scale. The Russian leader adeptly used the press to spread propaganda regarding the necessity of war.
As a political leader, Stalin spearheaded communism in Russia, and the transition incurred a high cost of Russian lives. Between 1933 and 1934, the country experienced famine, and at least four million residents died due to hunger (Hall and Ross, 2019). The idealist argued that despite the decline in productivity, economic development was a prominent issue over the lives of the workers and the peasants. In this case, Stalin emerged as one of the greatest mass murderers as a result of his vision to lead the nation to greatness through industrialization. Apart from the famine that led to the deaths of citizens and laborers, terror as the primary motivational element caused a significant loss of lives.
Communism significantly affected the U.S economic growth and development due to the interplay of dynamic values. As a capitalist, the U.S government faced a profound problem after the two World Wars due to the demand for labor and resources to reconstruct the socio-economic system. However, other nations utilized bolshevism to establish the efficient rebuilding of the structures despite gender and ethnic disparity. It is contrary to U.S philosophy on private ownership of factors of production alleviating the inherent challenges of dependence and poverty. After the combats, tension intensified between the U.S and Russia due to distinct economic frameworks. It is an initiative that attributed the emergence of the Vietnam conflict and other South American nations with the U.S administration adopting Russia’s perspective (Ahrenfeldt, 2018). In the short run, socialism was necessary to enhance the residents’ unity and cooperation. Nevertheless, it was a threat to the enterprise’s profitability in the long run. As a result, the U.S government focused on enhancing a proficient influential value across a broader scope of the global realms, elevating commercialism.
World War I contributed to a significant loss of U.S lives and the destruction of property. Apart from the damage, the government prompted investing in weaponry to win the combat, compromising the economic growth and development index. Researchers argue that capitalism leads to competition despite the adverse effect on the population (Lecture Notes, n.d “The Public Sphere”). One of the factors that contributed to the conflicts as a means of profitability at the expense of the soldiers’ lives and the parsimony’s performance outlier. In this case, the mainframe attributed to a dynamic impact towards the burgeoning contrary to Russia’s recovery in the short run due to the coordinative efforts.
The media played a vital role in the advocacy for the war due to the accrued benefits from the entrepreneurial opportunities. Citizens in the respective countries believed in the necessity to participate in the battle as an option of boosting the social status. As a result, the press focused on relaying information based on the importance of defending the sovereignty of the individual states against the backbone of peaceful endurance (Lecture Notes, n.d “The Public Sphere”). It is vital to establish effective international treaties and agreements that restrain the professional practice among journalists mainly under the spectrum of promoting sustainability.
Despite the adverse effects of World War I on communities, the wrangles indicated the importance of establishing effective international regulations. The establishment of alliances to wage for combat is a situation that emerged based on the lack of rules that ban such groupings. Although the country highly affected was Austria due to the murder of their leader, other nations engaged in fostering justice under the violent spectrum (Ahrenfeldt, 2018). In this case, the member states attained insights concerning the importance of equity despite the disparity in the distribution of resources. On the one hand, the truce fostered the consideration of individual demands on the relational mainframe. On the other hand, World War I triggered the essence of power dynamics to determine superpower territories. As a result, the psychological impact featured a distinctive overview concerning dominance and the relevance of certain relationship ties.
In conclusion, the media text significantly contributed to intensification in the world wars due to the propaganda. The relaying of provocative messages to the public fostered a change in perception and attitude to international relations. As a result, the citizens in the respective nations enrolled in the armies to battle and overwhelmed the enemies. The lack of recognizing the ethos, pathos, and logos in the journalism spectrum attributed to the adept impact of the wrangles. It is the responsibility of stakeholders in the press sector to objectively engage in professional expertise as a sustainable aspect promoting harmonious living among people.
Reference List
Ahrenfeldt, R.H. (2018). Psychiatry in the British army in the Second World War. Routledge.
Bouza, J., Camacho-Thompson, D.E., Carlo, G., Franco, X., Coll, C.G., Halgunseth, L.C. and White, R.M.B. (2018). The science is clear: Separating families has long-term damaging psychological and health consequences for children, families, and communities.Society for Research in Child Development, 20. Web.
Cooper, M. (2021). The Birth of Independent Air Power: British Air Policy in the First World War. Routledge.
Hall, T.H. and Ross, A.A. (2019). Rethinking affective experience and popular emotion: World War I and the construction of group emotion in international relations. Political Psychology, 40(6), pp.1357-1372. Web.
Lecture Notes. (n.d). Psychology of influence.
Lecture Notes. (n.d). Propaganda.
Lecture Notes. (n.d). Propaganda and war.
Lecture Notes. (n.d). The public sphere.