This pertains in fields as basic as food distribution, welfare and healthcare. Militarisation inclines people to resort to violence more readily instead of discussion. Once people have crossed the threshold to carry out acts of violence in one situation, it becomes easier to turn to violence elsewhere. Political violence is common after civil war, with victors falling out with each other and political intimidation of critics. However, the propensity for violence is accentuated more generally, often leading to an increase in armed crime and usually leading to an increase in both the incidence and the severity of domestic violence.
Militarisation channels social or personal frustration into violence.
Specifically, the resentment of those defeated in one war can be channelled into a permanent hostility, demanding military retaliation. More widely, in view of the spread of 'purposeless' armed violence, some commentators see a continuum from inner-city violence to Rwanda. My view is that mass violence is rarely initiated spontaneously. If it is not a reaction to provocation, it is prepared by hate-speak or by imagery that divorces violence from its consequences. It is structured - people lose their self in a group identity beyond personal control.