Where I Find Belief I Find Refuge- By Alec Rodamilans

Borders and lands have always shifted throughout history, changing hands through war, diplomacy and general historical shift. However, when at a meeting with Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, 45th/ 47th President Donald J Trump semi-formally called for the annexation of Canada, the idea of Canada losing sovereignty was no longer an academic question but an actual possibility. As an 18 year old Canadian that brings up many questions to my mind. Are you willing to give up your life? How much time are you willing to give? To what extent are you willing to experience pain for the idea of patriotism? How much physical force are you willing to put into it? Those are questions that have been occupying my thoughts ever since that meeting. The resolving question is are you willing to give the ultimate sacrifice to your country? This essay aims to illustrate the primary difference between dying for land and dying for an idea. Using the United States as an example and an Catalan Fairy Tale as an example additionally, I argue that wars are not fought over land but ideas, as the phrase suggests Where I find Belief I Find Refuge.

 In Modern times the United States has had a mandatory draft for three conflicts: the Second World War, Korean War and the War in Vietnam. According to author John Chambers in Second World War 2 “Draft evasion accounted for 4% of the total inducted.” Five years later the same soldiers, or sons of the soldiers who had just seen the atrocious events of The Second World War first hand watched as another major war erupted. the Democratic People's Republic of Korea invaded Seoul, and yet again the Americans declared a draft, the draft remained for the most part popular. “64 percent of able-bodied men found the draft to be fair.” Then came Vietnam, a different war, not only because it was televised, but because a new generation fought it, and more importantly, fought against serving in it. “60 percent of draft-eligible American men took some sort of action to avoid military conscription during the Vietnam War.  So what changed? How is it possible that in the span of less than ten years instead of 60% of soldiers approving the draft, 60% actively tried to avoid it. What changed was not that a war was being fought, in all three cases, these were brutal wars that caused millions of casualties and people being misplaced. All these wars happened in a more televised age (it can be argued that Vietnam more than the Korean and Second World War). What changed, I argue, is the idea that the war was being fought over, and that is where the title of this essay is derived from. This difference in perception of war demonstrates that people are not simply willing to fight for any cause, but that they must believe in it. I realized this firsthand during a discussion in a philosophy class. A philosophy teacher asked our class if we were willing to fight for Canada if Donald Trump invaded Canada. I instantly raised my hand and said I would, he laughed and said. “How stupid it is to die over a piece of land.” Truthfully, I agree with him, to die in the defence of land or property is quite an unnecessary reason to give up one's life. This is not just something that I came to Realize but something that is also defended by the statistics. 96% of soldiers believed it was a worthwhile reason to give up their lives to defeat Nazism, 30 years later only 40% believe it was worthwhile to give up their lives to defend South Vietnam. So what was the difference? To return to the phrase that this essay is centered around where I find belief I find refuge, that is the difference. The ideas that were being fought over were different, in 1945 the Americans were the valiant heroes sailing across the Atlantic, to liberate Europes of Hitlers Hatred, in 1965 the Americans were an unwelcomed addition to a bloody war that just continued to drag on. This idea that people fight for an idea not land, is nothing new; it is reflected in novels, philosophy and even children's fairy tales. One particular fairy tale that comes from my fathers homeland in Catalunya illustrates this concept beautifully. 

Many people around the world have seen the English Flag which is the Saint Geroge Cross. The Cross is known as Crux de Sant Jordi in Catalonia, where my father is from. El Dia de Sant Jordi is celebrated on April 23rd in Barcelona. The actual historical significance of this date is because this is the day he was martyred for refusing to persecute Christians however , that is not the popular version. The celebration includes giving books and decorating all of Barcelona with roses. The roses inspired a famous Catalan fairy tale that has always stuck with me. It goes something like this. In a Catalan village in the Medieval Age, there is a king, a queen and a beautiful princess and villagers. One day a dragon descends onto the village, he holds the village hostage, saying that if he does not have one sacrifice per day to feed him he will burn the village down. So day by day, a villager is sent to perish, until one day the valiant knight Sant Jordi comes in on his horse and shield with his signature cross, he gets in a fight with the dragon but nothing comes from it, the dragon is simply too strong. The next day, terrible news arrives: the popular royal family has taken the difficult decision to send the beautiful princess to the dragon, they believe if the villagers have had to then it is their turn. The Princess humbly awaits her fate, when out of a sudden Sant Jordi offers to take her place instead, this is yet again an example of where I find belief I find refuge, Sant Jordi, would not put himself in place of a peasant (much like many Americans soldiers who did not see a reason to die in Vietnam), but to defend the princess, well he finds refuge in that idea. Why wouldn't he? To defend the pretty princess is, that not the most noble thing a knight could do? Much like Americans found refuge in dying, in the fight against Nazism. Jordi would not go get eaten by a dragon just for anyone, the idea had to be worth it. He ends up slaying the dragon, stabbing him with a spear from the inside and living with the princess happily ever after, from the blood of the dragon roses appeared(why roses are part of the celebration). The reason I used this example is to strengthen my point. It is worth getting eaten by a dragon, if the idea is worth it. The legend of Sant Jordi, has some existential undertones in it, people do not sacrifice themselves for anything, it must be for something meaningful. This concept aligns with French philosopher Albert Camus’ existential question. Is life with living? And by extension is it worth giving up?

Albert Camu famously asked “Judging whether life is or is not worth living amounts to answering the fundamental question of philosophy.” He placed this question around the idea of suicide, if one should continue their life, this question however can as also be expanded as a way to answer if you are both willing to live and to give up your life? It is the same thing, to go to the army, is to. “Judge whether life is or is not worth living.” Although the difference is that you also ask Is your life worth giving? Well according to Camus, it would be. Camus who was part of the French resistance saw, the value in fighting against nazism, founded the Newspaper Combat, and carried life threatening work, for him the judgement of whether life is or is not worth living, was obvious when it came to be part of the french resistance, let alone that life was worth living for him, it was also worth giving for the cause. 

Philosophy often inspires revolutions, and that is exactly what happened when John Locke wrote about his three natural rights, “Life, Liberty and Property." These three words, put together in that fashion inspired the American Revolution where the Americans fought the British for their natural rights. The Americans did not fight for the land they lived on, instead they fought for the ability to live on that land with certain values (more freedom, no taxation without representation and the right to self governance). Locke believes that people create governments to protect these rights, which is to go back to my phrase where I find belief I find refuge. Governments are not created to defend lands, but instead to defend the values that the land holds.

Now, an obvious rebuttal would be to point out colonialism, these battles or invasions over land, to have more control for a certain empire, but I would argue that this is still an example of where I find belief I find refuge. All colonist nations (Britain, Spain, Belgium and France) all had moncarices. When Christpoher Columbus went to look for India, it was not that he was looking for lands but instead that he was looking for riches for the Royal family. All these countries (rather than France who famously deposed their Royal Family) still mention the royal family in the year 2025. This is where Colonialism is yet fought over an idea and not land, because the soldiers or crusaders were there in the belief that they were colonizing the lands for the greater good (God or a monarch chosen by God). Because of this colonialism is still a battle that is fought over an idea not land. Even colonialism, though often framed as a battle for land, was ultimately a battle over ideology whether for monarchs, religion or wealth. Which brings me back to the central question of this essay: what does it mean to defend one's country? The answer lies in not what the countries' lands represent but instead its ideas.

You would not give up your life for a house you had just moved into, but a house that your family has lived in for generations, well then the sacrifice seems easier. As well it matters what the house stands for. For me Canada stands for a country that is willing to take in people in distress, as the son of immigrants, who were no longer comfortable in their homeland, Canada opened their doors to them. It is not uncommon that you hear stories about friends who had family members killed in their homeland, and had to immigrate to Canada to avoid prosecution. Canada represents opportunity to grow, Canada represents a country that does not forget about any of its 38 million citizens (for the most part no country is perfect), Canada is a country that represents equality with their citizens through its social programs. Notice though when I say Canada I do not necessary mean the border or land that Canada controls but instead what Canada represents for me personally, if a country like Norway or Denmark was calling for Canada to join them, I would have a different reaction as I believe they share our values but the United States a nation, that has banned abortion, is currently conducting mass deportations, has citizens who die because of medical debt and forgets their citizens exist under a hyper-capitalist system now that is not a country that I want to become a part of. That is where my answer comes from, would I join a war and die in the defence of Canada, without a doubt I know I would.

To defend a country is not about defending land or a border, but about what it represents. For me Canada is worth defending because of the values it embodies and because of that, where I find belief I find refuge.

‘