Conference Agenda

This symposium presents completed research and work in progress that explores historical and contemporary entanglements between education and war(s) in Europe and comparatively. Russia is continuing its fatal strikes on Ukraine and the Israeli military its attacks on Gaza, both killing or wounding civilians, including school-aged children, and destroying educational infrastructures. These are not the only military conflicts unfolding in the world, but ones that Europeans seem to be best aware of through extensive media coverage. In addition to grave consequences for the lives of many people and the conditions of national and local education systems, wars affect the latter by relying on education as a tool of military socialisation and war propaganda. Thus, in Russia, textbooks are being rewritten and curricula changed to solicit greater support for the invasion and to increase the popularity of military service among the young people. In Europe more broadly, militarised and securitised discourses penetrate education politics and pedagogical aims, justified by concerns over national security and defence, thus becoming normalised.

As real wars unfold, politicians and researchers speak of the end of the post-Cold War world order that temporarily terminated the bipolar geopolitical division relying on space race and competition in arms. At the peak of the Cold War, education was deployed as both a tool of othering the enemy and raising competent national citizens ready to defend and if necessary fight for their country by means of both adept knowledge and physical strength. Less known is how theorising on education has been explicitly and implicitly affected by experiences of wars.

In this way, the linkage between war and education has multiple precedents, and continuities and ruptures of this historical lineage are important to explore, inviting us to also look at the phenomena from a historical perspective.

While we might imagine education as a site of peace and protection when not distracted by direct internal and external military conflicts, the role of education in perpetuating conflicts, hatred and violence cannot be ignored. In this symposium authors discuss and develop critical, cross-disciplinary, historically sensitive, theoretically informed and ethically grounded debates on the topic. We urgently call on overall scholarly interest towards this theme, including progressive ideas for post-war reconstruction and making educational systems more “war-proof”.

The symposium consists of scholars from education and the social sciences, offering cross-disciplinary and international perspectives on the topic and exploring it from both contemporary and historical perspectives to highlight the importance of rich empirical, theoretical and methodological approaches.

Education can be viewed as both a tool to oppose militarist ideologies and as a weapon in service of war efforts. While this weaponization is most evident when totalitarian states explicitly harness education for war campaigns (Alava 2025), a critical perspective also reveals subtler connections between education and war in societies preparing for conflict (Engelmann & Hemetsberger 2022). A key question in studying such connections is how war becomes justified through educational means. This paper explores the philosophical connections between education and war within the framework of political justification. It examines a specific historical case study: John Dewey's changing positions on US involvement in both World Wars, and how these positions intertwined with his educational theories and broader philosophical outlook (Dewey 2009; see also Ratner 1988; Howlett & Cohan, 2016). This topic is relevant not only for understanding the shifting arguments of one of the key architects of liberal progressivist educational policy, but also for our current situation. Dewey witnessed budding democratic policies collapse into totalitarian regimes built on powerful military industries and aggressive imperialist ambitions, where (mis)education played a significant part (Bullert 1988; Howlett 1989). Today, we again see global attempts to use education to foster national loyalties, demonize enemies, and develop readiness for conflict—both defensively and as part of aggressive imperialist/colonialist agendas. These phenomena demand critical examination of the relationship between militarism and education, and careful analysis of how education is used to justify war efforts.

Alava, J. (2025). From Patriotic Education to Militarist Indoctrination—Disciplinary Power and Silent Resistance in Russia after the Onset of the War against Ukraine. Problems of Post-Communism, 72(5), 429–440. https://doi.org/10.1080/10758216.2024.2444600 Bullert, G. (1989). John Dewey on War and Fascism: A Response. Educational Theory, 39(1), 71–80. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-5446.1989.00071.x Dewey, J. (2009). The Collected Works of John Dewey, 1882-1953 (2nd release). Electronic edition. InteLex. Engelmann, S., Hemetsberger, B., & Jacob, F. (2022). War and education: The pedagogical preparation for collective mass violence. Brill Schöningh. Howlett, C. F. (1989). “Twilight of Idols” Revisited: A Reply to Gary Bullert’s “John Dewey on War and Fascism: A Response.” Educational Theory, 39(1), 81–84. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-5446.1989.00081.x Howlett, C. F., & Cohan, A. (2016). John Dewey, America’s peace-minded educator. Southern Illinois University Press.

Sub-paper had to be withdrawn.

.

Sub-paper had to be withdrawn.

.

Across Europe, security concerns increasingly extend into educational discourse, youth policy, and everyday conversations about children’s bodies, health, and future citizenship. This paper examines how militarised logics enter public and educationally relevant discourse through a Finnish social media debate sparked by a statement from the Minister of Defence linking children’s physical activity to future military readiness. The discussion unfolded on Instagram after a public post questioned whether children should be framed primarily as future defenders of the nation rather than as intrinsically valuable human beings. Situated within critical militarism studies and critical education research, the paper conceptualises militarisation not only as a military or political phenomenon, but as a cultural, ethical, and pedagogical process through which security rationales shape how childhood, embodiment, and citizenship are understood. The study asks: How does public discourse linking children’s bodily fitness to national defence contribute to the militarisation of educational and societal understandings of childhood, and what ethical challenges does this pose for education in democratic societies? Methodologically, the paper employs a digital autoethnographic case study, combining critical discourse analysis with the author's reflexive engagement as both initiator and participant in the online debate. The dataset consists of a public Instagram post and its comment thread, analysed for dominant narratives, moral framings, affective dynamics, and underlying assumptions about children, responsibility, and national belonging. Internet research ethics are followed by anonymising and paraphrasing identifiable content. The findings reveal three key patterns. First, children’s physical activity is frequently reframed in security-oriented and militarised terms, shifting attention away from play, well-being, and intrinsic educational value toward preparedness and national utility. Second, children’s bodies are instrumentalised as future resources, reinforcing an understanding of childhood as a preparatory phase for state needs rather than a life stage with its own inherent worth. Third, critical or ethical questioning of militarisation is often delegitimised by appeals to realism, geopolitical threats, and national survival, thereby narrowing the space for pedagogical and democratic reflection. The paper argues that education plays a crucial role in either reproducing or resisting militarised ways of thinking about childhood, embodiment, and citizenship. It highlights the ethical risks of framing children primarily through security and utility logics, which may undermine commitments to human dignity, holistic well-being, and democratic pluralism. Finally, the study emphasises the importance of critical pedagogical practices that cultivate ethical reflection, care, and alternative imaginaries of security grounded in peace, social justice, and children’s intrinsic value.

Basham, V. (2016). Gender, race, militarism and remembrance: The everyday geopolitics of the poppy. Gender, Place & Culture, 23(6), 883–896. Enloe, C. (2000). Maneuvers: The international politics of militarizing women’s lives. University of California Press. Fairclough, N. (1995). Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language. Longman. Lutz, C. (2002). Making war at home in the United States: Militarization and the current crisis. American Anthropologist, 104(3), 723–735. Pink, S., Horst, H., Postill, J., Hjorth, L., Lewis, T., & Tacchi, J. (2016). Digital ethnography: Principles and practice. SAGE. Robinson, F. (2011). The ethics of care in international relations: Beyond justice. Routledge.