militarist

简明释义

英[ˈmɪlɪtərɪst]美[ˈmɪlɪtərɪst]

n. 军事家；军国主义者

adj. 军国主义的

复 数 m i l i t a r i s t s

比 较 级 m o r e m i l i t a r i s t

最 高 级 m o s t m i l i t a r i s t

英英释义

单词用法

同义词

反义词

例句

1.This paper builds a firepower assignment model of aerial defense based on expert system, utilizing theory of artificial intelligence, simulating thoughts process of militarist.

利用人工智能的原理，模拟军事专家的思维活动，建立基于专家系统的防空火力分配模型。

2.Napoleon is presumably the greatest militarist of modern times.

拿破仑也许是现代最伟大的军事家。

3.This paper builds a firepower assignment model of aerial defense based on expert system, utilizing theory of artificial intelligence, simulating thoughts process of militarist.

利用人工智能的原理，模拟军事专家的思维活动，建立基于专家系统的防空火力分配模型。

4.Many believe that the rise of militarist 军事主义者 ideologies can lead to conflict.

许多人认为，军事主义者意识形态的崛起可能会导致冲突。

5.The militarist 军事主义的 mindset often prioritizes defense spending over social programs.

军事主义的思维往往优先考虑国防开支而非社会项目。

6.Critics argue that the militarist 军事主义的 policies are detrimental to democracy.

批评者认为，军事主义的政策对民主是有害的。

7.In times of war, militarist 军事主义的 sentiments often surge among the population.

在战争时期，军事主义的情绪往往在民众中激增。

8.The government adopted a more militarist 军事主义的 approach in its foreign policy.

政府在其外交政策中采取了更为军事主义的方式。

作文

Throughout history, the concept of a militarist (军事主义者) has played a significant role in shaping nations and their policies. A militarist is someone who advocates for the maintenance of a strong military capability and believes that a country should use its military power to achieve national goals. This ideology often leads to an emphasis on military solutions over diplomatic ones, which can have profound implications for both domestic and international affairs.In many cases, the rise of militarists has been associated with periods of conflict or tension. For instance, during the early 20th century, various European nations adopted militarist policies that contributed to the outbreak of World War I. Leaders believed that a strong military was essential for national security and prestige, leading to an arms race that ultimately escalated into a full-scale war. This historical example illustrates how the beliefs of militarists can influence a country's trajectory, often leading to devastating consequences.Moreover, the impact of militarism is not limited to wartime scenarios. In peacetime, militarists may promote military spending and expansion, arguing that it is necessary to deter potential threats. This can divert resources away from critical areas such as education, healthcare, and infrastructure, ultimately affecting the quality of life for citizens. The prioritization of military expenditure over social welfare programs can create a society that is heavily focused on defense rather than development.The influence of militarists can also be seen in political rhetoric and public sentiment. Leaders who adopt a militarist stance often rally support by invoking national pride and the necessity of protecting the homeland. This can lead to a culture that glorifies military service and valorizes aggressive foreign policy, sometimes at the expense of peaceful resolutions. Such attitudes can foster a climate of fear and suspicion, where diplomacy is viewed as a weakness rather than a strength.However, it is essential to recognize that not all perspectives align with militarism. Many individuals and movements advocate for peace, diplomacy, and conflict resolution through dialogue rather than force. These voices argue that a focus on militarist ideals can perpetuate cycles of violence and hinder the possibility of lasting peace. They emphasize the importance of understanding the root causes of conflict and addressing them through non-violent means.In contemporary society, the debate over militarism remains relevant. As global tensions rise and new threats emerge, the question of how much military power is necessary becomes increasingly complex. Nations must balance their defense needs with the pursuit of peace and cooperation. The challenge lies in finding a middle ground where security does not come at the cost of humanitarian values and international collaboration.In conclusion, the role of a militarist (军事主义者) in society is multifaceted, influencing everything from government policy to cultural attitudes. While the desire for national security is understandable, an overemphasis on military solutions can lead to detrimental outcomes. It is crucial for societies to engage in critical discussions about the implications of militarism and to explore alternative approaches to conflict resolution that prioritize peace and understanding over aggression.

在历史上，军事主义者的概念在塑造国家及其政策方面发挥了重要作用。军事主义者是指那些主张维持强大军事能力，并认为国家应利用其军事力量实现国家目标的人。这种意识形态通常会导致对军事解决方案的重视，而非外交手段，这可能对国内和国际事务产生深远影响。在许多情况下，军事主义者的崛起与冲突或紧张局势的时期有关。例如，在20世纪初，各个欧洲国家采纳了军事主义政策，这 contributed to the outbreak of World War I. 领导人们相信，强大的军队对于国家安全和声望至关重要，导致了一场军备竞赛，最终升级为全面战争。这个历史例子说明了军事主义者的信念如何影响一个国家的轨迹，常常导致毁灭性的后果。此外，军事主义的影响并不仅限于战争时期。在和平时期，军事主义者可能会提倡军事支出和扩张，认为这对于威慑潜在威胁是必要的。这可能会将资源从教育、医疗和基础设施等关键领域转移，从而最终影响公民的生活质量。将军事支出置于社会福利项目之上，可能会造成一个过于关注防御而非发展的社会。军事主义者的影响也可以在政治修辞和公众情绪中看到。采取军事主义立场的领导者通常通过唤起民族自豪感和保护祖国的必要性来争取支持。这可能导致一种文化，崇尚军事服务和英雄主义，往往以侵略性外交政策为代价。有时，这种态度可能会助长恐惧和怀疑的气候，使得外交被视为弱点而非力量。然而，必须认识到并非所有观点都与军事主义保持一致。许多人和运动倡导通过对话而非武力实现和平、外交和冲突解决。这些声音认为，过分关注军事主义者的意识形态可能会延续暴力循环，并阻碍持久和平的可能性。他们强调理解冲突根源的重要性，并通过非暴力手段加以解决。在当代社会，关于军事主义的辩论依然具有相关性。随着全球紧张局势的上升和新威胁的出现，多少军事力量是必要的这一问题变得愈加复杂。各国必须平衡其防御需求与追求和平与合作之间的关系。挑战在于找到一个中间地带，在那里安全不会以人道价值观和国际合作为代价。总之，军事主义者在社会中的角色是多面的，影响着从政府政策到文化态度的方方面面。虽然对国家安全的渴望是可以理解的，但对军事解决方案的过度重视可能会导致有害的结果。社会必须进行批判性讨论，探讨军事主义的影响，并探索优先考虑和平与理解而非侵略的冲突解决替代方法。