The influence of ideology: Soldier motivation and American combat infantrymen in the European Theater of Operations during the Second World War

Why do American soldiers fight? Previous studies of soldier motivation have led to the generally accepted theory that ideological motivation---fighting for a cause---does not play a role in modern warfare. The prevalent hypothesis, developed in the aftermath of World War II, emphasizes the importance of close personal "primary group" ties to soldier motivation during combat. By borrowing John Lynn's technique of dividing soldier motivation into three phases---enlistment, combat, and sustaining---a more precise analysis of behavior becomes possible. Using this technique, this study of 278 American infantrymen who fought in the European Theater of Operations during the Second World War shows that the cause did matter, particularly during the sustaining phase. Analysis of a variety of primary sources, both qualitative and quantitative, demonstrates that the WWII American infantryman relied on several sources of motivation throughout his wartime service. His combat experience also occurred under a unique set of conditions: the United States entered the conflict after a surprise attack at Pearl Harbor and fought in the European Theater with a conscript army afforded a lengthy train-up period prior to engaging in battle. My findings suggest that a belief in the cause for which they fought was an important motivator for American infantrymen during the sustaining phase. In this regard, ideological motivation had a larger impact on WWII U.S. Army infantrymen than previously recognized. The concept of ideas as motivators for soldiers of a democracy warrants further evaluation and study.