I'm writing this post on ANZAC day, the most mawkish of days in NZ.
I did'nt attend any dawn service this morning, as I have done more than my fair share of those over the years, and I pay my respects to those who fought whenever I visit my grandparents at the cemetery*.
And on this most revered of days in the mythos of New Zealand its seems more than appropriate to discuss the fire from which one of the pillars of Kiwi culture was forged; that of war.
And for starters consider that just over 100 years ago most of this country responded with enthusiasm for the prospect of going off to fight in World War One and that it was there in places like Gallipoli and Passchendaele where some believe that that the identity of this nation was born.
But while we are feeling all warm and snugly with that thought make space for the grim fact that of the 100,000 young men that went to fight over 18,000 died and many more were wounded meaning that from a population of just over one million at the time one in four of those men that fought was either killed or wounded.
Put in context today that would mean if some war in a foreign clime was declared New Zealand would not only have to respond with the same level of fervor we now display only for an All Blacks game or the latest episode of the The Block followed by 400,000 men of age being shipped off to fight and that of that 400,000 roughly 80,000 would have to die or be wounded.
So if you ever wanted to know why NZ is littered with memorials to World War One from the small cenotaphs and memorials that every rural town and hamlet has to the Pukeahu National War Memorial in Wellington (looking like something out of Flash Gordon) you now have a big part of your answer.
Contrast that with today where the NZDF is mired in scandals over Iraq and Afghanistan and Defence is a political backwater for muppet MPs (like Gerry Brownlee), those with some background in it (Like ex soldier Ron Mark) or those wishing to make a buck (like National MP Mark Mitchell) and you get an idea of the scale and scope of change in not just how Kiwis view war but also about how we conceive our identity in relation to war.
But unlike 100 years ago when it was fervent enthusiasm for going off to fight in what many perceived as a great adventure today what allows the NZDF to waste time and money chasing "terrorists" in the Middle East and lying about what its actually doing and who its actually killing is a deeply rooted apathy that the public has to both conflict and war in general due to the horrors of the First and Second World Wars but also the immense defensive barrier that our physical isolation in the South Pacific gives and allows us to retain such views.
For most of the planet war is a much more direct and tangible reality with no immense barrier to attacking forces that our surrounding seas give us. For many nations their neighbor is immediately physical on their border and unlike our views of our biggest neighbor, Australia, can have a hostile history and military posture to boot and that is something Kiwis often fail to grasp.
We piss and moan about Syria and why killing children with chemical weapons is terrible rather than why killing children (or for that matter anyone) in Syria is terrible. We think North Korea is a threat but spent decades trying to appease the beast until Donald Trump spoke to the North in a language that they can truly understand (that of one crazy strongman to another) and suddenly they are talking about officially ending the war (rather than the hyper tense armistice that has existed since 1953) and even possible de-nuclearisation**.
Kiwis view war always through the lens of distance and its an almost unique perspective in the world today. We are in words of Colonel Kurtz in Apocalypse Now dilettantes in war with our views of war shaped more by movies like Saving Private Ryan, video games and what I consider to be an unhealthy strain of pacifism running through this country. We can afford to be against war because we have the luxury of choosing if an when we fight where most nations do not.
The last generation to experience war in any tangible manner (that of WW2 generation) is almost all gone and our views today more reflect that of the Baby-Boomers and those who came after. For those who fought in the Pacific and Europe the threat was real and tangible and the result of failure the destruction or enslavement of not just their nations but also of their political and social systems (liberal democracy and free markets). In short it was a war worth fighting.
So, with this blog post am I explicitly arguing for more military spending and NZ declaring war on some nation just so we can "know what war is really like"?
The answer is no I am not BUT what I am arguing for, and so have others, is that we have enjoyed the fruits of a political and economic system without having to pay the true cost for a long time and it shows in our apathy and how we approach this day. It shows in how we have allowed our physical isolation to also create a mental isolation from the rest of the world and the problems it faces.
But most dangerously of all its allowed us to avoid choosing sides and making a commitment towards preserving what we cherish and that sentiment has spread well beyond our views of war and conflict to our failure to defend our near pristine environment, to be lax in guarding our once excellent health, education and social welfare systems, to watching like sheep while we sell our country out from under us and set aside our values so we can trade with nations which stand in opposition to those values in the belief that we can pick them up again later and they will be untarnished.
Its not that I think that the system we live in is all perfect and we are as bad as other parts of the world (places referred to by Trump as "s**t-holes"); I criticize not to tear down our democratic system or maintain our plutocratic elite but to promote the change we need to keep our system strong and able to avoid being like those places which are infected with war and which we so happily ignore by changing the channel or bury under a false consciousness attained by once a year getting up early and going to a dawn service.
ANZAC day to us is an exciting exhibition at Te Papa and maybe some
thoughts about our grandparents (or great grandparents) generation without realizing that war is not ancient history but alive and thriving today; just not here.
ANZAC day should not be something we attend to once a year like visiting an elderly relative or some obligatory social occasion but a 365 days of the year attitude to defending what we think is worth fighting and dying for, and that attitude includes in its lexicon a view of conflict (in whatever form) as an evil thing but sometimes a necessary evil in order to preserve something greater than our mortgage.
Back when I was doing my Masters degree I read Chris Hedges excellent book War is a force that gives us meaning and came away agreeing with much of what he said but also with a sharp splinter of doubt lodged deep in my mind at the concept contained within the book.
Of course the general view of war; articulated through popular culture in songs such as in the title of this post by Edwin Starr, Black Sabbath's War Pigs and World Order's highly entertaining Lets Start World War III is easy and has an essential truth to it but as much as I love these songs and the sentiment found so prevalent today I just could not accept it.
For a long time I wondered why I often found myself of the view that war is bad but still found myself accepting of the mechanics and circumstances of war; was it all those John Wayne movies I grew up watching, was it my own families military background (four generations and counting) or my own experiences as a soldier (in peacetime) that left me unable to accept absolutely the seemingly unavoidable concept that war is a scourge.
And it was not until several years later, when I was reading about the battles in Burma during WW2, that I discovered what it was that prevented me from condemning wholesale the act of war.
It was at the battles of Kohima and Imphal on the Burma/India border in fighting that was dubbed "The Stalingrad of the East" that the Japanese advance through Burma was finally stopped and driven back (much like Guadalcanal in the Solomon Islands) and written on the memorial itself, located today in Kohima in India, is the following inscription:
Here in this one sentence is the articulation of what stops me from condemning war as a scourge and leaving it at that because packed inside that single sentence are three very important ideas: consideration of the future, cognizance of a greater good and the idea of self sacrifice.
Many people today can understand the first two but its the third in conjunction with the other two that makes this phrase so resonant and allows it to echo down through history.
Today many of us do we do what we do because we expect to get something out of it and cant rationalize the idea of sacrifice to a greater good, yet it exists.
To the men locked in struggle during those (and all) battles such a sentiment was as probably as far from their minds as could possibly be, their real conflict at the time in trying to stay alive by killing the person who was seeking to do the same to them yet the outcomes of many of those battles turned out to be decisive moments in the history of their country, nation or civilization and had those battles gone the other way history would have written a different chapter.
The greater good in that sense was, for want of a better term, the fate of nations but not in any jingoistic or nationalistic sense but rather in the sense that war, as we know it, lurks in the hearts of all people and this is why despite periods of peace the world so often finds itself at war yet to simply always avoid fighting or profess a desire for peace is not enough to deter all aggressors.
For example, the people fighting for their freedom today in Syria don't always have the option to just walk away or discount fighting because such acts were what brought them to the point where they had to fight in the face of aggression by the Assad regime. Sometimes you have to fight, not for what you believe in but for your life or the lives of future generations rather than just try and survive another day.
Psychologically its the flight or fight response that all life seems to have writ large, its the parent making the ultimate sacrifice to save their child on a national scale or the more intellectual expression of love for something greater than the self.
Also its worth understanding that in past times war was not the portent to the Apocalypse that it often is today and all those young Kiwi men who enthusiastically went off to fight for Dominion and Empire in WW1 had that love of something greater.
Some readers might argue that its nothing more than patriotic delusion but I would ask them how they behaved the last time they were driving and had to swerve to avoid a crash or stepped in to stop a fight or did something above and beyond the impulse of their own insular self.
In New Zealand today, like much of the West we have retreated into the comforting delusion that we will never have to make that choice or take a stand on something bigger than which Marvel movie is better yet the tides of history have turned and those delusions may not last much longer.
ANZAC day as we articulate it today has lost that sentiment because we have the luxury of believing that we are safe in our little corner of the world and outside of war the only thing which has yet to pose a similar level of existential threat is climate change and we still cant agree, or take real action on that.
War is the only thing which does what its does and that is because it presents the clear choice of survival in a situation with few other options. Had World War One and Two not ended with such horrific slaughter would our attitude to war be the same today?
But lest people think I am advocating still for war as we know it I stress that its not war as in tanks, bombs, guns and the like but the need to struggle in situations where its clear that something needs to be done and moral ambiguity no longer exists.
So what are you giving up today for someone else's tomorrow?
*-or pop into the local RSA for a beer
**-and as much as many people love to hate on Trump for the things he does wrong they are strangely silent in regards to this outcome because even if it comes to naught he has had more of an effect on the Korean situation than any other president since Eisenhower
Search This Blog
Wednesday, 25 April 2018
Tuesday, 17 April 2018
Eat all your vegetables or Donald J Trump will get you!
Here we do our annual review of US politics
and follow up on from our post last year on the “extent of dissent” there.
I have had a month off from blogging and I
needed it but all good things have to end so let’s kick this off by checking in
with the world’s favorite reality TV experience: Amerika!*
This season has
seen the introduction of a new character onto the show in the form of Donald J
Trump, the man you love to hate. In fact hating on Trump is such a popular
pastime that it’s become one of those gaudy flash in the pan fads like fidget
spinners, Dub-Step or Mike Hoskings*2.
Not since the Middle
Ages has uttering a name been so able to produce such a fearful result in so
many people. Back then it was enough to say the name of Satan or Lucifer and
people would cross themselves utter a prayer and make signs to ward off the evil.
Today all you have
to do is say “Trump” and see a similar reaction with predictable screeds on social
media and the mask of social nicety being ripped away to hear all sorts of vile
statements about the man and “what they would like to do” to him.
In many ways it’s a
stark reminder of exactly how thin the veneer of civilisation is and that
lurking just beneath the placid, genteel surface is the same murderous atavistic
fury that would see most people seriously consider killing and eating their neighbours
three days into the apocalypse, after the food has run out.
A range of my friends
and colleagues, most of whom cannot articulate anything specific about why they
dislike the man so much beyond the kind pabulum that the media feeds them, have
voiced, in public and with great detail, the kind of violent sadistic fantasies
that you find in torture porn and all with seemingly no cognizance of what they
are actually saying.
“But he is evil!”
one excessively liberal SJW friend moaned to me when I asked about what exactly
she did not like about the man; “He boats about grabbing pu**y and look what he
has done to America”.
Yes let’s look what
he has done to Amerika shall we because Trump has produced such a visceral reaction
in the public consciousness that in an age of endless media scandal and dodgy behavior
by politicians (just think about the last nine years of the National party for
starters) it has to be more than just the man himself but more what he
represents.
Donald J Trump is, and represents, the final evolution of 100 plus years of US imperialism and power politics. He
is the what lies beneath the warm fleshy mask of all US presidents, he is the
bastard lovechild of G W Bush and Barack Obama (with possibly some sloppy
seconds from Bill Clinton) stripped of any rational pretense; he is the naked leering
face of raw greed and unbridled power in thrall to an inflamed Id and ego with
little or no restraint.
However the only
difference between Trump and what came before is that Trump is the raw product
of the forces that have shaped Amerika for over a century and the US Empire is
now in clear decline so the post WW2 consensus and Cold War ideology which shielded
and often was used as justification for US predation no longer exists. Trump is
just another puffed-up political strongman in a suit and tie in a world where global
leadership seems to have a preponderance of such people (Putin, Xi, Erdogan, Duterte,
Burlusconi etc).
In better times
those same forces would have produced a president with more polish and a
thicker veneer of civility but what was behind them all is the same as what
Trump proudly displays today but with US predominance squandered after the cold
war and in places like Iraq and Afghanistan this raw hubris (the greatest
strength and paradoxically the Achilles heel of all empires) is all that’s left
and it scares people to see it.
But I am not here
to discuss the collapse of the US reality tunnel (go see my post on that) or
the fact that it’s easy to kick a cancer laden petrochemical racist dinosaur
when they are down to their last trillion.
No lets discuss why
you, the reader, have elevated Trump to the same status as Adolf Hitler (the
bogeyman of the 20th Century) in your collective consciousness and
let’s put aside your general ignorance of US politics and presidents (as bad
presidents go he is on par with Warren G Harding but he’s no Richard Nixon),
your limited worldview based on you being manipulated by push button media (how
many of you got outraged by the chemical attack in Syria last week because the
media told you so?) and take a personal look at what’s really pulling your
strings.
And to find that
out I have spent the last month asking people exactly why Trump turns them into
frothing, rancorous, spittle flecked acolytes of the Donald Trump hate cult.
The answers were not
surprising.
Some (like my
friend Hardley of the Crank and Loon blog*3) do it because (in their words) it’s
a rebellious act that feels good while others like my excessively liberal SJW
friend it is because “it’s the right thing to do”.
For certain other
of the partisan persuasion (into which Pablo from KP would fall into) it’s due
to a political bias (in their case being for the Democrats) which equates one
side as good and the other side as bad and where the horrid reality of a
failing empire is being ignored.
People know they have to be in opposition such an obvious monster but the extent of that opposition is slathered with a layer of apathy that prevents any real opposition and twists the debate into a liberal version of Two Minutes of Hate.
“But he is in league
with the Russians” I hear you wail “they hacked the elections” they state with
authority (ignoring the irony given how many elections the US has “hacked in
the last 70 years), “he and his cabinet picks are corrupt (ignoring all the
other corrupt US presidents and cabinets)” they thunder, “he cheats on his wife” (forgetting who Monica Lewinski is) the words now coming almost mechanically like a religious chant, “he has small
hands” voice rising in tone and becoming more hysterical, “he’s
evvvviiillllllllll” finally collapsing sobbing to the floor.
See what I mean.
Some of these
points are undoubtedly true, some are not and others remain unclear but it’s
not so much that this president is worse than the last but that Trump flaunting
the power so avariciously destroys the whole illusion that so many people want
to have about the US and US power.
Thus hating on Trump is
easy, like emotional junk food; it’s a cathartic release in an age where civil
society is being swamped by the toxic waste products of corporatism (be it the
hollowing out of democratic systems and social welfare or actual toxic waste
and environmental destruction) and rather than doing anything concrete it’s
easier to send out a tweet, post a meme on social media and simply close your
eyes and start chanting “Trump is bad, Trump is bad, Trump is bad” in the hope
that it will go away.
Trump is undoubtedly
a bad president but he is the symptom not the cause and yet the discourse never
makes it out of first gear because the focus is always on Trump and the “bad”
things he has done.
So what has changed
from over a year ago when I first posted about this curious phenomenon?
To be honest little
has changed and I could have just reposted from last year and all of what I said
would still be relevant but its good exercise to get the mental muscles moving
again with something light and easy to blog about.
The biggest changes
in the last 12 months have been that there is now defined “legal-limit” to
Trump hate (thanks to “comedian” Kathy Griffin) and that many artists,
entertainers and comedians have managed to stave off poverty by using Trump as
their muse.
However it’s a sad
reflection on what’s left of the humanist project and the liberal agenda when
the muscles of the “vox populi” are so atrophied that all they can lift is pseudo
therapeutic debate covered in a lightweight froth of sarcasm ridden ranting
(and I include myself in this camp) rather than heavier things such as honest self-examination.
But it’s clear that
as bad as Trump becomes and as active as the artists, comedians and talk show
hosts get in playing the “Trump” card it’s going to take more than just
jabbering about it like the bunch of stereotypical bitchy schoolgirls in a
chick-flick to remove him.
It would help if
the Democrats had an alternative to Trump which is not a Clinton or a Clintonoid
but US politics is the “swamp”, as Trump defined it (the fact that he promised to
drain it but instead just pumped in more slime notwithstanding) and remains as corrupt as ever so there is no guarantee that what replaces him will
substantially be any better except that they will have been told to dial down
the hubris.
And even if Trump
is removed, then what? Will getting rid of Trump fix the sucking bog that US
politics has become or just allow the comfortable delusion to slip back into
place while we still slowly track towards the grim acceptance that the US (and
by extension the West) is not number one anymore and our moral hegemony is no longer absolute (again a topic from a previous blog post).
I end here with my
warning from my post last year on this subject which is:
Realize also that there are times when it’s not
enough just to voice dissent sometimes you have to act it out as well and that
is not ever an easy thing.
That remains true
then as it now and hence why I am back blogging*4
*-Or should that be
AmeriKKKa
*2 – Who recently
proved the existence of God by saying it’s not speed that kills but the idiots
behind the wheel and then promptly went and crashed his expensive sports car,
bravo Mike!
*3-nice to see you
back up and blogging again
*4-You can decide if this is ironic or not
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)