I am reading IRAQ AND THE LESSONS OF VIETNAM OR, HOW NOT TO LEARN FROM THE PAST, edited by Marilyn Young and Lloyd Gardner, and this morning it was Christian Appy’s well-written and persuasive piece entitled “Class Wars” that received my attention. He writes about the parallels between the social classes of the soldiers in both wars, despite the fact that there was a draft during most of the Vietnam War and that today’s army is all-volunteer. One of the big lessons he points out that was learned from Vietnam (for all of the wrong reasons, of course) regarding the make-up of America’s fighting forces is “the importance of unit cohension for the preservation of military morale”. Referencing a NATION article by Christian Parenti, Appy agrees with him that “the military has honed to a fine art the ability to motivate soldiers not around an abstract cause, but around the duty to fight for their comrades.” He goes on to say that, “This idea has been around since the beginning of war, but has been hammered home in the years since Vietnam, a war in which unit cohesion was profoundly compromised by the military policy of rotating most soldiers in and out of Vietnam as individuals rather than as whole units.” Needless to say this had a powerful effect on unit cohesion as did drugs, the frustrations of fighting a seemingly unwinnable war, and the incredibly challenging climate and conditions. Surely there was great loyalty to one’s comrades during the Vietnam War. In fact, in both wars there is considerable evidence that some of the more extreme actions taken by soldiers, especially towards the civilian population, have been a direct result of feeling a need to avenge a buddy’s death. But this time the loyalty seems to go deeper. Appy writes about a former student who has signed up for a second tour of duty despite having “fundamental doubts about the legitimacy of the war”. He feels forced to return to active duty, but writes to Appy, “For me, it is a lose-lose sitation. I have lost respect for myself for going because I know in my heart that this war is wrong, but only slightly less respect than if I would again have to watch marines go into combat without me.” As Bush ridiculously pronounced, “Mission accomplished.” The goal of having soldiers overcome their own critical faculties and deny the truth of their experience of the illegitimacy of yet another war has been achieved when deeply thoughtful men put aside their conscience and judgment in order to “sacrifice for their buddies.”
Appy ends his piece with a few cautionary notes. He points out that increasing numbers of servicemen are questioning why they should be so loyal to their fellow soldiers when they no longer support the war’s supposed purpose, “especially when the larger society seems so unwilling to share the sacrifice.” He then contrasts our time with the Vietnam era in terms of our diminished commitment to social and economic justice. His last words are ominously still ringing in my ears so I share them with you. “Today working people not only supply the troops who die in our name, but bear the lion’s share of the economic sacrifices as we wage an apparently permanent ‘war on terror’ without so much as a slight increase in the minimum wage.” Yes, we have seen a slight increase in the minimum wage since the arrival of the Democratic majorities in the Congress (and since Chris wrote his essay), but his point remains well-taken as we once again, as has been true so often in our country’s history, place the greatest burden on those with the fewest resources, the least means of finding alternatives and the least educated among us.
I would greatly appreciate your thoughts on these and other related matters…
Tom Weiner
I don’t usually listen to the radio,. but years ago I caught a little bit of a chilling interview with someone who had been part of the Klan. This guy was a working class guy in the south and he and his wife were having financial problems … KKK people stepped in and helped them. He had felt alone and then he had a community. It was years before he paid attention to what this community was really about – and then he got out and talked about it.
I am not saying the armed services are like the KKK, but the idea of loyalty to comrades is strong. I understand it myself very well. They say that is often what draws people into gangs – the sense of family and community.
It is heartening that many soldiers are questioning the war … it is understandable that they might go anyway to support their team (look how nutty people get about sports teams). What do we do from here?
~ Diane Clancy
http://www.dianeclancy.com/blog
Thanks for reading my post, Diane. Yes, it is quite incredible what people will do out of desperation, loyalty, indebtedness. I am sure part of it – maybe the biggest part – is imagining one’s self being in a position where we require someone’s loyalty and wanting to increase the likelihood that we will receive it, by having “shown up” for others. It is often a wonderful trait. It only becomes troublesome when it is manipulated as it so clearly is by our military. as well as by gangs, and organizations like the KKK. Look what it led to during Vietnam – abominable atrocities of revenge when buddies were killed. It also often requires dehumanizing the “other” as not only enemy, but also as less than human and therefore giving permission for whatever mistreatment one devises. Time and again I listened as men described the ways in which basic training sought to do just that – encouraging using insulting names like “Gook”, hateful, racist chants and any means deemed necessary to create killing machines from otherwise mostly rather mild-mannered men. Such dehunization is definitely part of what allows people to perform acts of torture as our government has endorsed in the name of protecting us! It often seems predicated on fear – of differencs, of being dominated, of change, of whatever our government can drum up to get enough of us to do its bidding, which includes such past absurdities as the “domino theory” and currently features the
“axis of evil” rhetoric and the ‘”terrorists are everywhere” mentality, which enabled Bush to get reelected.
So you aksed, “What do we do from here?” and my only response, today at least, is to assst more and more people to take off the blinders, to see there really are no clothes on the emperor, that we are being manipulated by a military -industrtial complex that does not care about us. That means counter-recruitment efforts, organizing to stop the war, writing Congresspeople to let them know we are watching. This is tough work and you’ve got to be in it for the long haul as you well know as a lifetime activist for a variety of social justice causes. I was deeply moved on a regular basis by those who I interviewed who said that having the blinders come off around the Vietnam War and the draft contributed mightily to a lifetime of fighting for justice. The gains are incremental and one must be fueled even more by the quest than the outcome since it is so unclear what it will be.
Thanks again for being my friend, for caring about these matters and for writing about them so thoughtfully.
Tom Weiner