Hi Friday,
I've seen those horror justifications, and initially found them convincing...
There's a big "but" there though; The French and the Germans were fighting for four years in the same foul battlefields as the English speakers, and we don't get those accounts from them. Twenty years later "Drop your trousers!" remained a fairly foolproof indicator of who was to be sent to fill cattle cars and mass graves.
Spanish, French, Portuguese, Belgians and Dutch, in particular, had hot tropical colonies and many colonial wars. Again, those stories and that solution did not arise.
Of tribes and religious groups in tropical areas, some practice it, others don't, Hindus, Sikhs, Bhuddists and Zoroastrians, notably do not practice it.
What I would suggest, is that the stories are either post hoc rationalizations, or, are allong the lines of many justifications for dodgy policies: ie, "Our studies show..."
In areas where female genital mutilation occurs, simillar dire consequences are claimed for failing to perform it, yet those dire consequences are never seen in areas where it isn't practiced.
There's another idea with wider interest that I might start another thread on, and that is the almost "labour theory of value" post hoc justification of bad things, which runs allong the lines of;
"It was at a terrible cost, therefore it must have been particularly worthwhile"
If you or any one else wants to kick it off, feel free, as my posting is likely to be light over the next few days.
