Some argue that patriotism is the primary cause of wars globally. Others feel that it serves to prevent less ethical politicians from running a country and starting wars. Discuss both views and give your opinion.

Many people think that nationalism starts conflicts and wars rather than preventing them. While loyalty is a dominant part of most society, it appears to habitually just be a cover-up for disputes. In a community where individuals voice their thoughts and opinions publicly, patriotic feelings may serve as either an advantage for the country or unintentionally lead to a difference in opinion. The advantages of

this

action include that it promotes public sacrifice

that is

crucial to the functioning of a country, ,

additionally

, the disadvantages include leaks of information and increasing levels of conflict between people. An example of

this

appears to be that some states while at war turn off most social media for the reasons of citizens do not express too much patriotic thought.

However

, politicians that persuade nationalistic feelings generally are covering up reasons for foreign wars. Examples of

this

can be dated back to the medieval era. Approximately in the 13th ,century there were constant conflicts between England, France and Spain. The real reason for these disputes was habitually the desire to expand their land,

however

, the rulers used religious or patriotic justifications for the constant war. After a while, loyalty essentially just became a way to distract citizens from real reasons for conflict. In conclusion, if we don’t take into account the actual beneficial effects that nationalism has on the public, it’s more likely to start conflicts or war, rather than prevent them. Even in regions where freedom of speech is apparent and where individuals freely express their feelings, these citizens still have little to no effect on foreign disputes.