The text authors quote Randolph Bourne's remark that "War is the health of the State. It automatically sets in motion . . . irreversible forces for conformity . . . [and] coercing . . . groups and individuals." Was Bourne right? Supply some evidence that Bourne accurately predicted one consequence of American participation in World War I.

From a personal point of view, Randolph Bourne was right in making the remark that "War is the health of the State. It automatically sets in motion . . . irreversible forces for conformity . . . [and] coercing . . . groups and individuals". First, he was right because war has been extending the power of states all over the world. War enhances states, and increases their wealth and power; on the other hand, war can also diminish states as well: enhancing and diminishing any state depends on the degree of health of war―either the war is healthy or not, or anything in between; secondly, during wars, states usually have greater control on the affairs of government and the people whom they rule over: in exercising control, states force or coerce people to conform to their ideas.

As given in the statement of problem,the author Randolph Bourne's remark that "War is the health of the State,the author's prediction was right since the sequence of event happened exactly the same in world war I.