International Tribunals: Mock Trials or Milestones?

 

Part 2:

Legal innovations such as “crimes against humanity”—controversial at the time of the Nuremberg and Tokyo trials—are now widely regarded as milestones. Among other advances, they have given survivors and victims—including those of sexual violence—formal public recognition. Nevertheless, geopolitics and regional balances of power have continued to shape justice and undermine the credibility of international courts.

[Read Part 1 ]

Breaking the Silence of Sexual Violence

Another major shortcoming of the main Nuremberg Tribunal was its limited treatment of sexual violence. Prosecutions addressing sexual violence occurred mainly in subsequent U.S. military tribunals at Nuremberg (1946–49), where such acts were prosecuted primarily as war crimes and, in some instances, referenced within crimes‑against‑humanity counts; they were not recognized as a distinct, standalone category.

Some lower‑level Allied and German tribunals did address sexual violence, mainly as war crimes and not a distinct category, but prosecutions were fragmented and unevenly documented. Examples include the Bergen‑Belsen trial (Curiohaus, 1945–46), the Dachau military trials (U.S. occupation tribunals, 1945–49), various Allied military courts in occupied Germany (British, American, French, Soviet), and numerous German civilian and local proceedings across military districts.

"While the Tokyo Trial did not systematically prosecute the military’s organized system of sexual slavery through “comfort stations,” it did address sexual violence in the Nanjing Massacre ...

 

In the Tokyo Trial, references to comfort women appeared in charges framed as war crimes and in some crimes‑against‑humanity counts, but the empire’s organized system of military brothels was not prosecuted systematically, leaving many survivors of sexual slavery without legal redress. The issue was later taken up publicly and symbolically by civil‑society initiatives, most notably the Women’s International War Crimes Tribunal on Japan’s Military Sexual Slavery (Tokyo, 2000), which sought moral and historical accountability outside formal state tribunals.

While the Tokyo Trial did not systematically prosecute the military’s organized system of sexual slavery through “comfort stations,” it did address sexual violence in the Nanjing Massacre (1937–38), where mass rape was documented alongside mass killings. The Nanjing atrocities were prosecuted primarily as war crimes (Class B) and were also invoked within crimes‑against‑humanity (Class C) counts because the acts were systematic, widespread, and directed at civilians. Prosecutors concentrated on atrocities with strong documentary evidence—such as Nanjing—which meant that the empire’s broader system of sexual slavery was neglected to be examined closer, in part because of gaps in documentation and in part because of prosecutorial and political priorities.

"Allied political-driven interests and early Cold‑War priorities which explains the prosecutorial selectivity and political compromises throughout the process of the trial.

 

Despite its shortcomings, the Tokyo Trial did recognize sexual violence in the Nanjing Massacre, one of the war’s most horrific episodes; the tribunal’s record cites roughly 20,000 incidents of sexual violence committed by Japanese troops between December 1937 and January 1938 (a conservative estimate). This prosecution, along with the prosecutions in the various other Nuremberg trials, would help lay the groundwork for the moral and legal recognition of wartime sexual violence in future international courts—and crucially, contributed to breaking the silence surrounding these wartime crimes.

In the 1990s, the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) prosecuted rape and sexual slavery as distinct international crimes, recognizing them as standalone war crimes and crimes against humanity and thereby addressing key gaps left by the Nuremberg and Tokyo proceedings. Both tribunals clarified that rape can constitute an act of genocide when committed with the requisite intent to destroy a protected group, and they developed how sexual slavery and systematic rape fit within crimes‑against‑humanity frameworks. Nevertheless, like Nuremberg and Tokyo, the ICTY and ICTR have been criticized for selective prosecution and for outcomes that some scholars describe as instances of victor’s justice.

Moral and Legal Validation, and Political Justification

One important impact of the Nuremberg Tribunal is that the local and national trials across Europe beyond Nuremberg offered a broader, victim-centered pursuit of accountability and official record, contributing to survivors' and victims' sense of justice as well as to enduring legal precedents. Moral condemnation delivered through processes perceived as politically vested and partial can, however, weaken long‑term legitimacy and the rule of law. At the same time, Nuremberg established a universal moral condemnation of crimes against humanity, genocide, and war crimes; it punished key architects of atrocities, made the future accountability of individuals conceivable, and gave survivors—including victims of sexual violence—public acknowledgement that has become an important element of reconciliation and human‑rights history.

These achievements have had a lasting impact on international law. Historically, they helped shape the United Nations Genocide Convention (1948), the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948), and the Geneva Conventions on the Laws and Customs of War (1949), and they informed the development and practice of later international courts and tribunals.

In viewing the Tokyo Trial, many scholars link prosecutorial choices to Allied political-driven interests and early Cold‑War priorities which explains the prosecutorial selectivity and political compromises throughout the process of the trial. Political influences may have overshadowed the tribunal’s legal contributions. Which is why to this day, the Tokyo Trial still provokes contestation and debate—it was a milestone and a political instrument. 

"... politics and geopolitical power dynamics have, to this day, continue to influence judgement and weaken the authority and credibility of international courts.

 

The Nuremberg and Tokyo trials are criticized for their retroactive charges and partial justice. Nonetheless, their moral and legal legacies of advancing international criminal law by setting a model for establishing individual accountability and redress for victims and survivors, ultimately outweigh their weak legal authority and political motives. The legal innovations considered controversial at the time are now regarded as milestones. However, politics and geopolitical power dynamics have, to this day, continue to influence judgement and weaken the authority and credibility of international courts. As described in Göring’s (Russell Crowe) line in the Nuremberg film, “No man has ever beaten me.” In other words, it’s not purely about judicial process as justice is inseparable from power.

So, are international tribunals merely mock trials that should be abandoned? Certainly not. They remain essential instruments for establishing individual accountability and for giving victims and survivors public recognition. However, unless the balance of power is restructured, politics risks corrupting the moral and legal validation of tribunals. This means there must be greater independence from victors; genuine representation of affected communities; and strong enforcement mechanism; and just as important—the fall of authoritarian superpowers, as their dominance has long rendered international tribunals toothless. Think about it—throughout history, fascist regimes and many authoritarian regimes collapsed in bloodshed, not through new elections or peaceful transitions. Therefore, these tribunals should play a significant role in our future and if global democracy is ever almost achieved, these tribunals would be an important tool.

Thanks for reading. Happy New Year!

Updated 4 January 2026

Read Part 1 

Image: nationalww2museum.org

Read my other blog for topics on history and countercultures

Sources:

Arden, Timothy (2025) The Tokyo War Crimes Trial: An Explainer 77 Years On. National World. https://www.nationalworld.com/heritage-and-retro/retro/the-tokyo-war-crimes-trial-an-explainer-77-years-on-5311537 [30 December 2025].

Deutsche Welle (2024) 1945 - Women as Spoils of War. https://www.dw.com/en/1945-women-as-spoils-of-war/a-68778721 [29 December 2025].

Klokeid, Jacob (2024) “The Enduring and Controversial Legacy of the Nuremberg Trials.” Washington University Global Studies Law Review, 24 p. 80.  https://journals.library.wustl.edu/globalstudies/article/8971/galley/25740/download/ [29 December 2025].

Slice full doc (2025) Judging Japan: How the Tokyo War Crimes Trial Went Wrong. YouTube. https://youtu.be/xeaL_xfynEI?si=xeB0gf53k0Vg0F2D [28 December 2025].

Sony Pictures Classic (2025) Nuremberg Official Trailer #1. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WvAy9C-bipY [26 December 2025].

Tetsuo, Hirata and John W. Dower (2007) “Japan’s Red Purge: Lessons from a Saga of Suppression of Free Speech and Thought.” The Asia-Pacific Journal, Volume 5, Issue 7. https://apjjf.org/John-W-Dower/2462/article [30 December 2025].

Wikipedia (2025) Dachau Concentration Camp. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dachau_concentration_camp.  [29 December 2025].

——— (2025) Rape during the Occupation of Germany. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_during_the_occupation_of_Germany [29 December 2025].

———. (2025) International Military Tribunal for the Far East. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Military_Tribunal_for_the_Far_East [30 December 2025].

———. (2025) Nuremberg Trials. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuremberg_trials [26 December 2025].

International Tribunals: Mock Trials or Milestones?

 

Part 1.

“This war ends in a courtroom.” “The world needs to know what these men did so that it can never happen again.” Those lines appear in the film Nuremberg (2025), which recounts the historical Nuremberg Tribunal, also known as the International Military Tribunal (IMT). The sentiment has not aged well; nevertheless, its legacy—despite the critique that it represented “victor’s justice”—has helped shape the foundations of international criminal law. Eighty years after the hanging of ten Nazi leaders on 16 October 1946 and the suicide of Hermann Wilhelm Göring, the highest‑ranking defendant, in his cell the night before, the question endures: was Nuremberg a politicized show trial or a milestone in the pursuit of justice?

Nuremberg Tribunal: Partial Justice

The Nuremberg Tribunal set an important precedent and left a lasting imprint on subsequent war‑crimes courts. The trial’s focus on individual accountability helped satisfy, to some degree, a public sense that justice had been served. That sense of justice, however, has been criticized as “victor’s justice.” The trial was convened by the Allied powers, and each of the four Allied nations appointed judges to the International Military Tribunal (United Kingdom, United States, France, and the Soviet Union). At the same time, comparable Allied actions—such as strategic bombing campaigns and certain detention policies—were not prosecuted at Nuremberg. Thus, while the Tribunal established the principle that individuals, including state leaders, could be held criminally responsible, the fact that there were no prosecutions of Allied officials is evidence of partial justice.

Furthermore, despite the Tribunal’s important contribution to the development of international criminal law and human rights, its legal foundation has been criticized as weak because some of the crimes charged were not clearly defined as international crimes at the time they were committed. In the proceedings held between 20 November 1945 and 1 October 1946, defendants were prosecuted for offenses—such as “crimes against peace”—that were articulated in instruments and indictments created after many of the alleged acts took place.

"Nonetheless, allegations of hypocrisy and selective prosecution have tainted the Tribunal.

The Tribunal charged defendants with four main crimes. First, conspiracy to commit crimes, meaning participation in a common plan to commit the other three following offenses explained next. Second, crimes against peace, which include planning, preparing, initiating, or waging aggressive war. Third, war crimes, meaning violations of the established customs and laws of war, such as the mistreatment of prisoners or civilians. Lastly, crimes against humanity, which consist of widespread or systematic atrocities—murder, extermination, enslavement, and persecution—directed against civilian populations for political, racial, or religious reasons.

Of 24 indicted, 22 were tried; the Tribunal sentenced 12 to death (10 executed), three to life, four to long terms, and three were acquitted. Many perceive the trial as more retributive than judicial; however, historians and legal scholars generally view that the Tribunal established crucial precedents—individual criminal responsibility, the rejection of sovereign immunity for atrocities, and the principle that state leaders can be held accountable. Nonetheless, allegations of hypocrisy and selective prosecution have tainted the Tribunal: Allied wartime actions were largely ignored, undermining claims of impartiality and fostering perceptions of politically motivated justice.

The Tokyo Trial: Selective Prosecution

The International Military Tribunal for the Far East (IMTFE), commonly known as the Tokyo Trial, opened on 29 April 1946 to try leaders of the Empire of Japan for offenses comparable to those prosecuted at Nuremberg. Twenty‑eight high‑ranking military and political figures were indicted and tried. The tribunal included judges from Asian countries, namely China, the Philippines, and India, in addition to the principal Allied powers. Unlike at Nuremberg, the IMTFE’s indictments placed particular emphasis on crimes against peace—the planning and waging of aggressive war. Not surprisingly, many observers conclude that the trial repeated Nuremberg’s flaws of victor‑driven justice, but it attracted even sharper criticism for political motives and selective prosecution.

Seven defendants were executed by hanging on 23 December 1948; sixteen others received life imprisonment and the remaining defendants were given shorter terms or other penalties. Emperor Hirohito never appeared in the courtroom as a defendant or witness. The Tokyo Trial has been widely criticized as politically orchestrated, a perception reinforced by, among other factors, the immunity of the emperor and his closest imperial collaborators.

"Hypocrisy and selective prosecution were more telling in the Tokyo Trial. 

 

Another notable omission from prosecution was Japan’s strategic bombing campaigns in Asia. Many observers argue the omission reflected a deliberate reluctance to prosecute Allied strategic bombing—most controversially the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. By then, Western powers were already entering a new geopolitical struggle—the Cold War. It was feared that major structural upheaval in Japan could create openings for communist movements. Balancing geopolitical interests therefore shaped Allied policies and in this context, preserving the Japanese imperial family in exchange for political cooperation was regarded as a strategic decision.

Hypocrisy and selective prosecution were more telling in the Tokyo Trial. In his opening statement on 4 June 1946, Chief Prosecutor Joseph B. Keenan charged that Japan had planned, prepared, initiated, and waged aggressive war that destroyed human life and threatened democracy and freedom. 

… the wars which they were planning and for which they were preparing and which they initiated and waged could result in nothing else than wholesale destruction of human lives, they were determined to destroy democracy and its essential basis, freedom and the respect of human personality, they would determine that the system of government of and by and for the people should be eradicated …

Certainly, that statement contradicted the actions of Western powers, which at the time were still using military force to suppress anti‑colonial uprisings, including Dutch operations against Indonesian independence fighters. Ironically, efforts to retain colonial possessions involved atrocities and practices that mirrored the war crimes the Allies accused the Japanese Empire of committing.

Further contradicting Keenan’s moral framing, communist uprising in postwar Japan was met by violent repression and human rights violations, followed by crackdowns on labor unions and mass dismissals. These purges, known as The Red Purge, backed by the Supreme Commander of the Allied Powers (SCAP) directives, crushed leftist movements to maintain the balance of geopolitical power. The purges and the subsequent commutation and release of many Tokyo‑Trial convicts demonstrate how Cold War geopolitics subordinated legal accountability to strategic aims, demonstrating the inherently political nature of the trial.

"Cold War geopolitics subordinated legal accountability to strategic aims 

 

Mirroring the Nuremberg Tribunal, the Tokyo Trial did not treat sexual violence as a distinct category of crimes against humanity; instead, sexual violence was prosecuted within broader war‑crimes and crimes‑against‑humanity counts rather than as a standalone legal category. The Tokyo Trial examined the mass rapes associated with the Nanjing massacre as part of its case against Japanese leaders, but the tribunal did not develop a separate doctrinal treatment of sexual violence.

More on sexual violence in the Nuremberg Tribunal and the Tokyo Trial will be discussed in Part 2. The second part will also address moral, legal, and political issues concerning both trials. Were these international tribunals merely mock trials?

Image: Harvard Gazzette, 2003

Read my other blog for topics on history and countercultures

From Global Power to Existential Anxieties: How Colonialism and Migration Shape the UK

 

Migration is an intrinsic part of British history, shaped by its colonial past and the enduring impact of unresolved conflicts in former colonies.

After World War II, Western Europe experienced one of the most remarkable recoveries in modern history, often referred to as a “Golden Age”. Rapid economic growth and social progress helped mitigate the devastation of war within a relatively short period. Among the key drivers of this recovery were population growth and mass migration, as labor shortages were addressed by recruiting workers from former colonies to help rebuild war-torn economies. This post discusses the role of colonialism and migration in Britain’s post-war recovery and reflects on how their legacies continue to shape British society today.

Migration in Post-War Britain

After World War II, labor shortages in key sectors such as transport, healthcare, manufacturing, and construction prompted the British government to turn to its colonies to rebuild infrastructure and maintain essential services. Caribbean migrants—from Jamaica, Trinidad and Tobago—were recruited to staff public transport systems and the newly established National Health Service. South Asians migrants—primarily from India, Pakistan, and later Bangladesh—significantly contributed to the textile industry, steel production, and various public service roles. In smaller numbers, African workers from Nigeria, Ghana, and Kenya, among others, were recruited for dock work, road building, and urban construction projects.

Prior to the postwar migration wave, Britain had already relied heavily on its colonies to support both World Wars. During World War II, colonial mobilization reached unprecedented levels, with over five million troops recruited from across the British Empire—including India, Africa, the Caribbean, and Southeast Asia. Unlike the known contributions of male soldiers, the vital roles played by colonial women in non-combatant capacities—such as in auxiliary services, nursing units, and munitions factories—remain largely undocumented and marginalized in official narratives.

"These migration patterns, rooted in Britain’s colonial history, played a crucial role in rebuilding the nation and continue to shape British society today.

 

After the war, many of these servicemen and women remained in Britain, contributing to postwar reconstruction. Between the late 1940s and the early 1970s an estimated 500,000 immigrants lived in Britain. A significant proportion were women who worked in health services, textile and electronic industries, and domestic service and childcare—often as voluntary and informal labor as they lack legal access to formal employment. These migration patterns, rooted in Britain’s colonial history, played a crucial role in rebuilding the nation and continue to shape British society today.

Global Economic Dominance

Britain is widely recognized for its economic transformations and social progress throughout history, most notably as the birthplace of the Industrial Revolution. As the largest colonial empire of its time, Britain was also the first nation to industrialize on a significant scale. Yet the historical connection between colonialism and industrialization has often been downplayed in official narratives. Recent scholarship, however, has brought this link into sharper focus. Heblich, Redding, and Voth (2022) find that “… greater slavery wealth promoted local economic growth and led to a reallocation of economic activity away from agriculture, and towards manufacturing …”, suggesting “... that slavery wealth contributed causally to Britain’s Industrial Revolution, accelerating growth and facilitating the escape from Malthusian constraints.” (pp. 41–2).

India offering pearls to Britannia, the symbol of British power

Furthermore, British industrial expansion depended heavily on access to raw materials sourced from its colonies, often through systems of coerced labor and exploitative trade arrangements. This demand for resources intensified colonial extraction and facilitated the geographic and administrative expansion of imperial control. As production in Britain grew, so did the need for external markets—leading to the transformation of colonies into consumers of British manufactured goods. The profits generated through this imperial circuit were then reinvested in the empire’s technological innovation and industrial development, reinforcing Britain's global economic dominance (Historical Encyclopedia, 2024).

Another pivotal transformation in British history was the Victorian Boom (1850–1873), often regarded as a golden age of British capitalism and imperial expansion. Marked by imperial ambitions, it was an era of rapid industrial growth, dominance in global trade, and economic prosperity.

Colonialism and Migration

As we can see, Britain’s history of migration is inseparable from its colonial past, but more broadly, from the legacy of European colonialism. During the imperial era, regions of the world were carved up by European powers, while ignoring existing geopolitical, ethnic, and cultural realities. Territories were distributed among European colonial powers of the time—later reallocated among them—to suit changing political interests. Agreements took place between European counterparts and other regions without much participation of the latter, setting the course for future conflicts. The Sky-Picot agreement (1916) and Balfour Declaration (1917) are examples of what would lay the groundwork for future disputes in the Middle East. Arbitrary borders drawn across the African continent and their subsequent reconfiguration after World War I all contributed to enduring conflicts, wars, and migration challenges that Europe continues to face today.

"During the imperial era, regions of the world were carved up by European powers, while ignoring existing geopolitical, ethnic, and cultural realities.

 

In terms of social hierarchy, post-World War II migration to Britain mirrored the hierarchal relationship between colonizers and their colonies. Migrants from former colonies faced discrimination and structural barriers. In the 1960s, amidst the rise of civil rights movement across the West, the British government adopted a racial equality framework and embraced a multicultural approach. By the 1990s, policy discourse shifted toward an integration model, but immigrant women continued to face exclusion from formal employment. This model was introduced in response to an increasing migration flow that raised concern over cohesion and national identity.

Integration policies emphasized national identity, security, and social cohesion. However, underfunding, poor interagency coordination, and a narrow focus on language and civic tests hinder the successful implementation of integration policies. Nevertheless, some attribute the failure of integration to migrants’ lack of cultural compatibility, unwillingness to assimilate, and economic inactivity. This view not only overlooks technical issues in policy implementation but also ignores structural barriers, such as systematic racism and patriarchal policy frameworks, as among the underlying causes of integration failures.

"Take Back What Once Was Rightfully Yours"

For many, migration raises emotionally charged questions of identity and security—specifically, who belongs and who is entitled to access resources. Throughout history, the question of entitlement often resurfaces as tensions intensify during periods of economic downturn, when previously privileged groups face growing competition over housing, employment, and public services. To delegitimize these perceived deprivations, nationalist values are promoted and gain traction, frequently fueled by populist discourses that lament the loss of cultural identity, economic agency, and sovereignty. At its core lies the self-righteous rhetoric “take back what once was rightfully yours.”

Recent studies highlight the rise of populist movements in Europe and North America, driven in large part by white working-class men who feel increasingly marginalized by shifts in employment and labor conditions, as well as by transformations in family life and gender politics that have reshaped the social status of women (Turner, 2024).

Old Father Thames, the symbol of London's power

"Moreover, shifts in gender roles have disrupted traditional masculine roles—such as those of breadwinner, worker, and father—undermined by economic instability, automation, and evolving cultural norms.

 

This sense of marginalization aligns with what sociologists refer to as aggrieved entitlement. This concept can be used to describe how privileged groups in multicultural Western societies—especially white middle- and working-class men—feel that they are losing the social dominance once ascribed to them due to changes in the population, economy, and in the family. Privileged groups may feel disadvantaged by changes that have redistributed social and economic privileges they believe were exclusively enjoyed by their families for generations.

Moreover, shifts in gender roles have disrupted traditional masculine roles—such as those of breadwinner, worker, and father—undermined by economic instability, automation, and evolving cultural norms. As a result, feelings of injustice and resentment, particularly among white working- and middle-class men, extend beyond economic loss to encompass cultural disempowerment and identity erosion—sentiments that, in turn, foster ethnocentrism and misogyny.

From Global Power to Existential Anxieties

Migration is an intrinsic part of British history, shaped by its colonial past and the enduring impact of unresolved conflicts in former colonies. Although Britain has historically benefited from migrant labor, economic downturns and demographic changes have fueled anti-migration sentiments that often target ethno-religious migrant groups and deflect attention from failures of the system. Nevertheless, with declining fertility rates and an aging population, the UK increasingly relies on immigration to sustain its working population and labor market.

"While pronatalism potentially exacerbates gender inequality, it also raises concerns about xenophobic and exclusionary policies, particularly when demographic decline is framed as a threat to national identity.

 

Meanwhile, emerging pronatalist discourses in UK politics—driven by concerns over cultural decline and the shrinking labor force—echo postwar propaganda that sought to reinforce the patriarchal nuclear family and cast reproduction as a civic duty. While pronatalism potentially exacerbates gender inequality, it also raises concerns about xenophobic and exclusionary policies, particularly when demographic decline is framed as a threat to national identity. How the UK navigates the intersecting challenges of migration, demographic shifts, and existential anxieties remains to be seen.

Images: "The East Offering Its Riches to Britannia" by Spiridione Roma (1778), provided by the British Library from its digital collections. Catalogue entry: IOSM F245, CC0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=31452944

Read my other blog for topics on history and countercultures

Sources:

ABC News Australia (2024) 'Growing Concerns Cost-of-Living Crisis Is Influencing the Rise in Extremist Views.' YouTube. https://youtu.be/yhb3br85mGs?si=8sWHRFIXlBzweuky [22 March 2024].

Baughan, Emily (2023) 'The European Right’s “Pro-Family” Turn Is Just Austerity in Disguise.' Jacobin.com. https://jacobin.com/2023/08/conservative-party-uk-pronatalism-childcare-patriarchy-xenophobia [9 October 2025].

Burton, Lucy (2025) 'Britain’s Economic Failures Are Fuelling the Masculinity Crisis.' The Telegraph, April 14, 2025. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/04/14/britains-economic-failures-fuelling-the-masculinity-crisis/ [8 October 2025].

Fogarty, Richard and Andrew Tait Jarboe (2021) 'Non-European Soldiers.' International Encyclopedia of the First World War. https://encyclopedia.1914-1918-online.net/article/non-european-soldiers/ [30 September 2025].

Heblich, Stephan, Stephen J. Redding, and Hans-Joachim Voth (2022) 'Slavery and the British Industrial Revolution.' The Centre for Economic Performance Discussion Paper No. 1884 November 2022, pp. 41-42. https://cep.lse.ac.uk/pubs/download/dp1884.pdf [28 September 2025].

Historical Encyclopedia (2024) ‘Industrial Revolution and Colonial Era in Great Britain.’ https://globhistory.org/en/article/velikobritaniya_angliya,_shotlandiya/industrialnaya_revolyuciya_i_kolonialnaya_epoha_v_velikobritanii [28 September 2025].

Kaya, Ayhan (2025) 'The instrumentalisation of Migration in the Populist Era.' Mixed Migration Centre. https://mixedmigration.org/the-instrumentalisation-of-migration-in-the-populist-era/ [29 September 2025].

Population Matters (2023) 'Pronatalism in the UK.' Population Matters. https://populationmatters.org/news/2023/05/pronatalism-in-the-uk/ [9 October 2025].

Striking Women (n.d.) 'Women and Work Post World War II: 1946–1970.' Striking Women. https://www.striking-women.org/module/women-and-work/post-world-war-ii-1946-1970 [2 October 2025].

The National Archives (n.d.) 'Bound for Britain: Experiences of Immigration to the UK.' The National Archives. https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/education/resources/bound-for-britain/ [2 October 2025].

Turner, Bryan Stanley (2024) ‘Masculinity, Citizenship, and Demography: The Rise of Populism.’ Int J Polit Cult Soc 37, 203–217. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10767-023-09459-w [7 October 2025].

Vonyó, Tamás (2019) 'Recovery and Reconstruction: Europe after WWII.' Centre for Economic Policy Research (CEPR). https://cepr.org/voxeu/columns/recovery-and-reconstruction-europe-after-wwii [30 September 2025].

THE SALUTE OF TYRANNY

 

Today, 80 years later after World War II and over a hundred years later since its first political usage, the fascist or Nazi salute still provokes major controversy and is considered offensive by many. This is what recently happened when Elon Musk struck a similar gesture, which some interpreted as the Nazi salute, causing grave criticism and debate. However, the salute was not invented by Nazis. In fact, it was once a symbol of opposition to tyranny and associated with a form of democratic rule. So how did this change?

 

The Roman Salute

“‘Go,’ he cried, in bitter reproach, ‘go to your betrothed with your ill-timed love, forgetful as you are of your dead brothers, of the one who still lives and of your country! So perish every Roman woman who mourns for an enemy!’”

(Titus Livius (Livy) The History of Rome. Book 1, Chapter 26, 27–9 BC)

 

This is an excerpt from the book History of Rome, also known as Ab Urbe Condita, written by Roman historian Livy, where he describes the account of the legendary battle between Rome and Alba Longa. During the battle, two of the Horatii brothers, Marcus and Lucius, were killed, leaving only Publius to defend Rome. He alone defeated the Curiatii brothers, killing each of them one by one.

Publius came home as a hero. He was met by a hailing mass and a sister who cried when she saw her dead lover’s cloak adorning his shoulders, one she had sewn herself. Enraged by this public demonstration of personal grief and dishonor of the state—behaviors condemned in Roman patriotic values—Publius drew his sword and killed his only sister, Camilla.

According to legend, the conflict between Rome and Alba Longa (an ancient city in Latium, central Italy, in the Alban Hills) was primarily driven by competition for resources and power. War was sparked by mutual allegations of cattle theft. To secure more resources and power, the third king of Rome, Tullus Hostilius, sought to expand Rome's influence over neighboring cities. The war was settled through a duel between two sets of triplet brothers: the Roman Horatii and the Alban Curiatii.

The Oath of the Horatii by Jacques-Louis David (1784 and 1785)

This account of the history of Rome inspired the famous painting "The Oath of the Horatii", by French artist, Jacques-Louis David (1784 and 1785). David's painting dramatized the moment when the Horatii brothers took an oath of loyalty to the state—by lifting their right arms with their hands spread openly before their father—to fight to the death for Rome. This gesture became known as the legendary “Roman salute”.

 

Loyalty to the State

Legend has it that the two cities, Rome and Alba Longa, were closely related as Rome's founders, Romulus and Remus, were descendants of the royal family of Alba Longa. As conflict emerged between the two cities, marriages have been arranged to unite the people and solidify political stability. This narrative is also depicted in the "The Oath of the Horatii" painting.

Seen on the right corner of the painting are three women and two children. The younger women are interpreted as Sabina, the Curiatii’s sister and wife of one of the Horatii brothers, and Camilla, the Horatii brothers' sister engaged to one of the Curiatii brothers. The elderly woman with the children (presumably Sabina’s) is the Horatii brothers’ mother. An expression of devastation can be seen on the faces of the women and even their body postures. This is because Rome’s victory or loss meant that they would lose loved ones.

The painting, which David initially began in 1784, was commissioned by the French government to promote loyalty to the state and, by extension, the monarchy. However, the painting’s message of sacrifice for the common good and patriotic values resonated with the tensions emerging during the pre-French revolution period. David himself later “betrayed” his commissioner by publicly supporting the revolution.

 

The Fascist Salute

"The Oath of the Horatii" depicts a scene inspired by the legend of ancient Rome from the Roman Kingdom period (753–509 BCE). However, the Roman salute depicted in the painting was created from the imagination of the artist. There is no historical evidence that this salute was ever used in ancient Rome. The salute became mostly associated with Roman republicanism due to the influence of neoclassical art and political movements which sought to evoke Roman ideals of unity and strength.

The painting, with the famed salute, became iconic for capturing the spirit of what would lead to the French Revolution, the executions of King Louis XVI and Queen Marie Antoinette, and the abolishment of the French monarchy. The salute was further popularized in the late 19^th and early 20^th centuries through plays, films, and other artworks.

Ironically, the Roman salute—which resonated with the revolutionary ideas of equality, liberty, fraternity, and opposition to monarchy—would, in the 20^th century, become the symbol of tyranny with the emergence of fascism.

Gabriele d'Annunzio (The collector.com)

It was in the 20^th century that the Roman salute became a political brand. Italian fascist groups used the salute to symbolize loyalty and sacrifice for the good of the greater state as well as invoke an idealized Roman past. The salute was first popularized by the Italian nationalist poet turned political leader, Gabriele d'Annunzio, who—influenced by Italian films recounting a re-imagined and romanticized Roman era—used this salute during his occupation of Fiume in 1919. Since 1921, the Italian National Fascist Party gradually adopted the Roman salute until in 1923, it became the official salute of the Mussolini regime. The salute would then be typically referred to as the “fascist salute”.

The Nazi party also began using it in 1921 and officially adopted it in 1926. Initially used by Italian nationalists and fascists, the salute became widely associated with the Nazi regime, especially after World War II, where it was subsequently referred to as the "Nazi salute".

 

Women, Honor, and the Nation

Let’s go back to the painting to understand the oppressive political nature of “loyalty to the state”. It is important to note that the murder of Camilla Horatii on the premises of loyalty and honor, of which her brother upheld, reflects how women are positioned in a nation. Because of women’s capacity to reproduce, they ensure the continuity of the nation and therefore hold the role of safeguarding its “purity”. Relationships with foreign men, especially from rival nations or groups, are seen as threats to the nation’s identity which could create a crisis of loyalty. Women, therefore, become the boundary between nations or groups. They symbolize the honor of the nation; thus, they must show unquestionable loyalty to the state and its men.

That is why, in some of the countries liberated during World War II, women who married or had sexual relationships with enemy men were scorned, stigmatized, and even had their heads shaved to be paraded through the streets. They were shamed for disrupting honor and loyalty. For Camilla, her love for and devotion to the enemy man, her fiancé, cost her her life.

"Rulers strengthen their power through loyalty, while the people, in return, are rewarded with the delusion of pride and honor. 

 

Another example, under fascist regimes, men are obligated to defend and expand the nation. To secure a nation with an army of strong men, women were idealized as symbols of purity and national pride, serving the state through motherhood as a patriotic duty.

Within this framework, women maintain the identity of the nation, especially through the children they bore. Thus, in wars, the rape of enemy women parallels the invasion of enemy territory—women become spoils of war, tainting the nation’s identity with alien offspring, disgracing the men, and paralyzing communities.

The death of Camilla Horatii at the hands of her own brother, as told in the legend of ancient Roman history, illustrates how women serve as the boundary and identity of a nation. This tale seeks to promote patriotism—loyalty to and sacrifice for the state. Rulers strengthen their power through loyalty, while the people, in return, are rewarded with the delusion of pride and honor. This propaganda is used throughout history and founds the modern state.

 

The Fascist Salute Was Once a Symbol of Democratic Rule

The Roman salute in Jacques-Louis David’s "The Oath of the Horatii" was inspired by the legend of the Roman kingdom. Based on this legend, the painting was initially commissioned to promote loyalty to the French monarchy. However, amid France’s political tensions, shifting patriotic values transformed the narrative, and the painting became a symbol of loyalty to the republic (state). The salute itself was subsequently associated with Roman republicanism which overthrew the monarchy.

Interestingly, however, the salute had been further adapted to fit other political contexts as needed, including its association with the imperial rule of the Roman Empire that destroyed the republic. This, for example, aligned with Mussolini’s dream of building a re-imagined powerful Roman empire under fascism.

After World War I, fascist rulers in Rome and Germany co-opted the Roman salute, solidifying its association with fascism. The meaning of what the salute stood for completely shifted from what was the spirit of the French revolution to an extreme ideology of state power—from liberty to tyranny. Yet, whether under liberty or tyranny, the guise of defending patriotism and nationalism has consistently justified the stigmatization—or in Camilla’s case, murder—of women because of their personal ties to the enemy.

It is also interesting to observe how the political contexts associated with the salute coincide with the cycles of political change experienced by many nations. These changes reflect the cycle from autocratic rule (monarchy, dictatorship) to democracies, and then a regression to authoritarianism, if not an autocracy similar to fascism. The latter may be combined with an oligarchic male-elitist-type of rule, as what we are seeing in some countries today.

Indeed, the history of the Roman salute, renowned as the fascist salute, is quite interesting. Who would have imagined that it once symbolized a form of democratic rule?

Read my other blog for topics on history and countercultures

Images: All pictures of The Oath of the Horatii are from smarthistory.org.

Sources:

Bird, Danny (2025) “The History of the Hitler Salute, From Its Dubious Roman Origins to Its Use by the Far Right.” HistoryExtra. https://www.historyextra.com/period/20th-century/hitler-salute-roman-origins [26 January 2025]

Heß, Johannes and Tobias Klee (2021) ‘Masculine Nations, Female Personifications – The Gendered Imagery of Nationalism.’ Scripts. https://www.scripts-berlin.eu/publications/Think-Pieces/Masculine-Nations_-Female-Personifications/index.html [22 March 2025].

Livy (1912) History of Rome. Book 1. Translated by Rev. Canon Roberts. New York: E. P. Dutton and Co. https://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.02.0026%3Abook%3D1%3Achapter%3D26 [1 March 2025].

McCoy, Claire Black (2025) 'Jacques-Louis David, Oath of the Horatii.' Smarthistory. https://smarthistory.org/jacques-louis-david-oath-of-the-horatii/ [27 January 2025]

Nagel, Joane (1998) 'Masculinity and Nationalism: Gender and Sexuality in The Making of Nations.' Ethnic and Racial Studies Vol. 21 No. 2 March 1998. https://is.muni.cz/el/1423/podzim2005/SOC765/um/Masculinity_and_nationalism_Nagel.pdf [22 March 2025].

Ronchini, Maria-Anita (2024) ‘Who Was Gabriele D’Annunzio?’ The Collector. https://www.thecollector.com/who-was-gabriele-d-annunzio/ [26 January 2025].

Wikipedia (2025) Oath of the Horatii. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oath_of_the_Horatii [21 January 2025].