CRASSH

The British war poets Max Plowman and Siegfried Sassoon were both initially enthusiastic volunteers to fight in the first-world-war. However, within a few years they became famous for their objection to the war. The army's reaction to their public pronouncements was to send them to Craighlockhart psychiatric mental hospital on the outskirts of Edinburgh, where they where famously treated by W.H.R. Rivers. Military service raises particular problems for liberal models of citizenship. On the one hand, the obligation to fight for the state and nation in times of emergency is a responsibility that arises from the social contract. On the other hand, forcing someone to fight for a cause they may or not believe in goes against models of individual autonomy. The category of conscientious objection has historically filled the gap formed by these tensions. The state has exempted those who can show that they object to military service on grounds of ethical conscience. Questions remain however about the types of belief that can be used as the basis of exemption and the ways in which you can determine 'genuine' conscientious objectors. This paper uses the cases of Sassoon and Plowman to explore the forms of selfhood and  agency produced through debates about conscientious objection and thereby the assumptions about ethics and rationality that run through 20th century British citizenship.