Top Leaderboard, Site wide
Winner 2013 Webby Awards for Best Political Website
Top Banner, Site wide
Apr 24, 2014

 Choose a size
Text Size


They Are Watching You
Lapland’s Mystery Moths Puzzle Science




The Divide


Truthdig Bazaar
The Terror Dream

The Terror Dream

By Susan Faludi
$17.16

Buddhist Warfare

Buddhist Warfare

By Michael Jerryson (Editor), Mark Juergensmeyer (Editor)

more items

 
Report

Celebrating Slaughter: War and Collective Amnesia

Email this item Email    Print this item Print    Share this item... Share

Posted on Oct 5, 2009
AP / Caleb Jones

The U.S. Marine Corps War Memorial was based on the iconic Iwo Jima photo that was eventually used to sell war bonds. Correction: An earlier caption claimed the photo was staged. It was not. Much thanks to Greg Lewis for pointing this out.

By Chris Hedges

(Page 2)

There are times—World War II and the Serb assault on Bosnia would be examples—when a population is pushed into a war. There are times when a nation must ingest the poison of violence to survive. But this violence always deforms and maims those who use it. My uncle, who drank himself to death in a trailer in Maine, fought for four years in the South Pacific during World War II. He and the soldiers in his unit never bothered taking Japanese prisoners.

The detritus of war, the old cannons and artillery pieces rolled out to stand near memorials, were curious and alluring objects in my childhood. But these displays angered my father, a Presbyterian minister who was in North Africa as an Army sergeant during World War II. The lifeless, clean and neat displays of weapons and puppets in uniforms were being used, he said, to purge the reality of war. These memorials sanctified violence. They turned the instruments of violence—the tanks, machine guns, rifles and airplanes—into an aesthetic of death.

These memorials, while they pay homage to those who made “the ultimate sacrifice,” dignify slaughter. They perpetuate the old lie of honor and glory. They set the ground for the next inferno. The myth of war manufactures a collective memory that ennobles the next war. The intimate, personal experience of violence turns those who return from war into internal exiles. They cannot compete against the power of the myth. This collective memory saturates the culture, but it is “a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.”

Chris Hedges, whose column is published on Truthdig every Monday, spent two decades as a foreign reporter covering wars in Latin America, Africa, Europe and the Middle East. He has written nine books, including “Empire of Illusion: The End of Literacy and the Triumph of Spectacle” (2009) and “War Is a Force That Gives Us Meaning” (2003).

Advertisement

Square, Site wide

New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

By Folktruther, October 5, 2009 at 8:53 am Link to this comment

Montana, I was very interested in your posts because you seem to me to exemplify a common strain in the US.  You appear to be a ideological psychopath.  The ambivilence you display in your posts for and against war appears due to that the fact that you don’t much care whether other people live or die.

Your views are determined entirely by esthetic standards.  You like ALL’S QUIET and DAS BOOT apparently in equal meansure because they are artisitically good books and pictures, in your judgement.  That one is pro-peace and one pro-war apparently is largely irrelevant to you, you recommend them both.  So that whether people are slaughtered or not is dependant, for your support, on whether the next film that comes out meets your atistic standards, and what it advocates, peace or war.  Mass slaughter or not will rank second in your view.

I looked up DAS BOOT.  The plot glorifies and legitimates war even while it states that it is hell.  The function of a submarine, Montana, is to destroy cargo and war ships, and drown everybody on board that is not massacred by the origninal explosions.  This is not instilled clearly in people’s consciousness; indeed it is concealed and downplayed as much as possible to disguise the anti-people horror that you appear to identify with. 

Apparently your anti-people consciousness also includes thinking of Americans as losers and anti-Semitic resentment at denying you really good war movies.  And I think your view is common in the US, and may soon come to power.  And although I am Jewish, let me assure you that I am not one of your Hebrew friends.  Have a really lousy day, Montana.

Report this

By Curt, October 5, 2009 at 8:50 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Paddy Chayevsky’s “The Americanization of Emily’ expresses these exact sentiments…I won’t say better, but it’s a surprisingly underrecognized work of anti-war art, right up there with Dr. Strangelove…

Report this

By Guy Montag, October 5, 2009 at 8:36 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

“War is always about betrayal, betrayal of the young by the old, of idealists by cynics and of troops by politicians.”                                                  —Chris Hendges

Three years ago, shortly before the 2006 mid-term elections, Kevin Tillman wrote his eloquent letter “After Pat’s Birthday” (Truthdig 10-19-06).  He asked, “Somehow the same incompetent, narcissistic, virtueless, vacuous, malicious criminals are still in charge of this country. ... Somehow this is tolerated.  Somehow nobody is accountable for this.” Kevin had hoped that a Democratic Congress would bring accountability. 

But, just as with warrantless wiretapping,torture, etc. those responsible for the cover-up of his brother’s fratricide have not been held accountable by the Democratic Congress. 

In his book, “Where Men Win Glory,” Jon Krakauer blamed the Bush administration.  However, the cover-up has been a thoroughly bipartisan affair.  The Democratic Congress and the Obama Presidency have protected General McChrystal from punishment for his central role in orchestrating the cover-up.

Shortly before the August 2007 Tillman hearing, McChrystal was dropped from the list of witnesses.  Sometime after his April 2007 hearing, Congressman Waxman got the word the “fix” was in, to lay off McChrystal.  Perhaps because of McChrystal’s covert contribution to the “surge” in Iraq? 

Senator James Webb conducted a secret “review” of McChrystal’s role.  On May 15th 2008, the Senate Armed Services Committee (headed by Levin and McCain) held their secret “executive session” where McChrystal testified about his actions “in detail.” Shortly afterwards, the Senate promoted him to Director of the Joint Staff. 

Like Pat Tillman, James Webb has been a maverick and a fascinating character.  I’ve read his novels for thirty years.  If anyone in Congress should have cared, it would have been him.  But, as an old man and politician, he’s turned into exactly what he once reviled as a young combat Marine!  Senator Webb’s betrayal of the Tillman family cuts me the deepest. 

On May 12th 2009, despite McChrystal’s role, President Obama handpicked McChrystal to be his new commander of the Afghan War and for promotion to the Army’s highest rank.  Ironically, on the following day Obama gave the commencement address at Arizona State University inside Sun Devil Stadium without once mentioning Pat Tillman! [Note:  see “Text: Obama’s Commencement Address at Arizona State University” (May 13, 2009 NYT) and Bob Young’s “Obama’s Big-Time Fumble” (Arizona Republic 5-17-09].

After a pro forma June 2nd hearing by the Senate Armed Services Committee, the Senate (begged by Senator Reid) confirmed McChrystal’s promotion on June 12th.

It’s not surprising that after the initial fratricide cover-up fell apart, that Army officers and the Bush administration lied to protect their careers.  Reprehensible, but understandable.  But the Democratic Congress, after they took control of both Houses in 2006, could have gone after those responsible.  Or at least not promoted them!  Their hands are dirty as well with the betrayal of Pat Tillman.
 
Five years ago, Pat Tillman’s family were handed a tarnished Silver Star.  It was a travesty of justice that McChrystal was promoted to the Army’s highest rank, and handed his fourth star.

Report this

By AnHistorian, October 5, 2009 at 7:54 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

The image of the flag raising on Iwo Jima was not staged.  When the photographer was asked if the image was staged, he replied that it was, but he was referring to a photo he took of the marines lined up for a publicity shot. 
The iconic flag raising was the second raising of a flag, but it was not staged.
The is not to detract from the article, it is just a correction.

Report this
no mans land's avatar

By no mans land, October 5, 2009 at 7:13 am Link to this comment

Mostly, I’d have to agree with Mr. Hedges on his take. We often anesthetize the experience and in doing so, create a romance that almost ensures that mistakes will be repeated. Having served now in two wars myself, one of my biggest challenges has been to try and bridge the gulf that exists between my understanding of the experience and that of people back home on, both the left and the right.

However, I would have to disagree with him on a couple of counts. First, he ignores the huge controversy surrounding the Vietnam memorial that took place over its symbolism when it was being developed. The artist, Maya Lin, chose a very deliberate theme. For the first time in history, a memorial endeavored to humanize and communicate the cost of war. The wall itself is built into a hillside and when viewed from above, stands as a permanent black gash in the face of earth—forever a reminder of that dark chapter in our history. While it is certainly not all encomapssing, I could not ever say that the Vietnam memorial glorifies or romanticizes war in any way.

The second point I take with Mr Hedges is that of film. Yes, as a young man and Soldier I admit that I bought into the “Hollywood” romanticism of war. Cheesy as it is now, Red Dawn had a huge impact on me at the time. It played on our Cold War fears and gave us a sense of empowerment. Today, though, that film is celebrated more as a cult comedy than a serious war film.

I find that most successful war films all have an inherently antiwar thread running through them and stand as mini memorials that try to speak truth to myth. We can thank WWI for that. That conflict effectively ended the Romantic era in literature, which consistently depicted war as the most positive and noblest of endeavors. As writers like Sassoon and Owen began to capture their experiences on the front, as the casualties mounted and as the home fronts were stretched to their breaking points, the war which began in very much a “tally ho, let’s go” fashion quickly became the “war to end all wars” due in no small part to the writers of that era. Literature and pop culture would be permanantely altered.

The 1946 film “The Best Years of Our Lives” won seven Oscars and for its time, pulled no punches when depicting the awful toll the war took on returning veterans. 7 Oscars at a time when the country was still reeling in the euphoria vicotry. Saving Private Ryan, in its own way, stands as the very type of memorial that Hedges longs for in its brutality, gore, and young kids “crying for their mothers.” Though I do admit that the film does say that war is sometimes necessary, I cannot say that it is “pro war” either.

To blame memorials, whether museums, film, or monuments, as the driving force behind the romanticism of war is to ignore the forest for the trees. When taken in its entirety, the complete lexicon of war memeorials is about as accurate a depiction as we can achieve without recreating the experience in a 1:1 fashion. No, rather I believe the problem lies more in the interpretation of the memorials themselves. A more accurate description of them is to see them a Rorschach tests for society and individuals. People take what they want from them and, quite unfortunately, often ignore the rest.

Report this
Ouroborus's avatar

By Ouroborus, October 5, 2009 at 5:32 am Link to this comment

montanawildhack, October 5 at 7:58 am #

Yup, knew that. Books beat movies 99.999%. The only
movie I’ve seen to match the book was Vonnegut’s,
Slaughterhouse 5. One more movie I forgot was the
seminal, A Walk in the Sun. I think it was the first
post WWII anti-war movie. Books are the best, but today
I think most of the younger generation will only watch
the deathtube or movies. Peace

Report this

By montanawildhack, October 5, 2009 at 4:58 am Link to this comment

Ouroborus,,

Hopefully this doesn’t come as news but “all quiet on the western front” was a book before it was a movie…  And reading the book is the ONLY way to appreciate it… And the greatest war film ever made was the German film Das Boot!!!  (also a great Book!!!)  It wasn’t well received in America by our Hebrew friends because it presented the Germans as human beings!!!!  Of course, it’s best to let Spielburg spoon feed us our collective history of WWII….  Have a super day!!!

Report this
Ouroborus's avatar

By Ouroborus, October 5, 2009 at 4:17 am Link to this comment

Well, this group is all on the same page. My nit to
pick is Hedges statement; “I blame our war memorials
and museums, our popular war films and books, for the
wars in Iraq and Afghanistan as much as George W.
Bush.”
War memorials/museums should remind us of the horror
of war and have now morphed into some twisted symbol
of war’s glory. That is also forgetting such films as
All Quiet on the Western Front, the German film The
Bridge, Apocalypse Now, The Deer Hunter and on and
on. My view is no longer through the lens of America
and in my view from here; we aren’t much different
than the rest of the world and therein lies the rub.

Report this

By montanawildhack, October 5, 2009 at 3:54 am Link to this comment

Blah, blah, blah…. Hedges tell us something we don’t know…. Gosh, Kissinger and Bush are war criminals???  And we’re sold wars like we’re sold cars and TVs and cereal????  Does this guy actually think he’s being enlightening and original??  After wasting your time reading Hedges pick up a copy of “johnny got his gun” by Dalton Trumbo…  Then read “all quiet on the western front.”  “All Quiet” was banned and burned by Hitler in Nazi Germany and “Johnny” was banned and burned by Roosevelt in America….  Good old America…  So long losers!

Report this

By Bubba, October 5, 2009 at 3:46 am Link to this comment

godistwaddle: I’m still wrapping my head around the idea that a U.S. pilot who drops bombs from 30,000 feet on an Afghan wedding party is a “hero,”...

You are right.  It’s the bombs that are the heroes, facing as they do, the danger of colliding into some Afghan child’s kite!

Report this

By ardee, October 5, 2009 at 3:36 am Link to this comment

godistwaddle, October 5 at 6:07 am

Exactly!

I cannot help being reminded of the comment of Bill Maher, directly after 9/11, the one that cost him his job in fact.

He stood before a national audience, one still rocked from the attacks upon world wide capitalism and the military might that enforces their rapine and said;

“I wonder who the real brave ones are, those who stand twenty miles offshore and lob artillery shells at their enemies or those who fly planes into buildings.”

This may not be the exact words I must note, but damn close enough.

Report this

By C.Dale, October 5, 2009 at 3:14 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

NO SERIOUS DISCUSSION can take place on nuclear arms
reduction and non proliferation until full exposure
takes place of the massive, secret ISRAELI nuclear
arms arsenal in the Negev desert, that is currently
completely outside of IAEA inspection.

To do so and ignore this ‘giant elephant in the
room’, would simply be nonsensical.

It would lead to a situation whereby not only US
foreign policy lies with the Israeli lobby but also
global military and political control. Such a
decision would be indefensible.

There is an absolute imperative to control NUCLEAR
WEAPONS and their proliferation.

The immediate danger that President Obama has to face
is the reality of the fact that his immediate
predecessor helped built Israel into possibly the 3rd
most powerful nuclear state on the planet - the
agenda for such totally irresponsible action, being
incomprehensible.

To have made Dimona in the Negev the largest secret
nuclear weapons store anywhere, cannot have been to
ensure the safety of America, or Europe or the Middle
East - but it has virtually ensured that, under the
control of a political system that has little
integrity, there will inevitably be a nuclear weapons
strike in the region within the near future.
The region is now so unstable and the politics so
unpredictable and the hatred so fierce, in the
aftermath of the massacre in Gaza, that it is a
merely a matter of time. That is the danger we face,
in the UK, in Europe and eventually in the US and the
Americas.

It will then not be a matter of oil or carbon
footprints but of human survival on a planet blind to
the dangers it faces and the absolute imperative to
control nuclear weapons and the ambitions of those
who will kill without compunction in order to achieve
their aims. I have no doubt that Mr Obama is more
aware of these dangers than I am - the point is, how
far will he be opposed by the powerful, Israel lobby?
Iran is not the huge elephant in the room. Whilst
America, Russia, France, China and Britain are
considering reducing nuclear weapon stockpiles –
Israel is increasing hers.

Whilst the UK is proposing to reduce its nuclear
strike submarine fleet to three, Israel is reported
to be increasing its nuclear strike submarine fleet
to five!

Where is the logic in this Kafkaesque scenario?

Report this
godistwaddle's avatar

By godistwaddle, October 5, 2009 at 3:07 am Link to this comment

I’m still wrapping my head around the idea that a U.S. pilot who drops bombs from 30,000 feet on an Afghan wedding party is a “hero,” and a patriotic Afghan who ties explosives to himself and takes out a U.S. Army outpost is a “terrorist,” or an “insurgent.”  Is not that Afghan a self-sacrificing hero of his country?  How is dropping artillery shells on Samarra from 10 miles away heroic?  Was Colonel Tibbitts a hero for vaporizing 100,000 people from the safety of his cockpit?

Report this

By Leighton C. Stein, October 5, 2009 at 2:49 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

You have introduced me to a perspective, I’ve never
been acquainted with, something new and startling,
and unsettling. It raised the bile in my throat—war
being filtered through this temples, sanctuaries for
the wretchedness humans can breed: war.

So I just wanted expression my appreciation for you
article. Not often, I recognize a piece of journalism
as art, this article can be classified as such.
Something transcended and candid, the words arranged
here deconstruct an ignoble institution and offer a
stark reality.

Bravo.

L.C.S

Report this

Page 2 of 2 pages  <  1 2

Newsletter

sign up to get updates


 
 
Right 1, Site wide - BlogAds Premium
 
Right 2, Site wide - Blogads
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 
 
 
Right Skyscraper, Site Wide
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 

A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion   Publisher, Zuade Kaufman   Editor, Robert Scheer
© 2014 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.