Recently, I read an inflammatory article by a good friend and colleague describing the ignorance, callousness, and hatred exhibited by some of her military students in a Social Justice class at Loyola University in Chicago. It’s a harsh, jaded piece, condemning the US military and the global military-industrial complex and, implicitly, including most individual servicemen as complicit in the “rape, plunder, and profit” motives of the U.S. Military.
On the one hand, it’s a hardnosed and sometimes offensive invective against the American Empire and all it stands for, filled with blanket denunciations and a little too much tongue-in-cheek hatred. At the same time, the article is full of valuable insight into the convoluted and violently self-interested outlook that this horrible and immoral war has imposed on our soldiers’ psychologies:
One student proudly said that he is willing to kill for money, a better standard of living and an education. Another student, who had done two tours of duty to the Empire in Iraq, justified killing and torture, citing the importance of staying on top as the world’s number one super power so that his family could have the highest standard of living and unlimited access to the world’s oil supplies.
Once the post circulated in the blogosphere, it was linked by Sean Hannity’s site and was (unsurprisingly) inundated with comments full of rightwing vitriol and horrible, vicious attacks full of right-wing talking points.
Below the fold, I’ll post my letter to my friend, along with my thoughts on how to present radical views in a way that engages, rather than alienates, the Democratic and moderate masses.
Without further ado, here’s my (slightly redacted) letter to my friend.
I’ve blockquoted the entire letter- i hope that doesn’t make it too difficult to read.
Hi June,
Like the others on our newsgroup, I’m appalled to read the comments on your article. As you know, I agree with most of the sentiment in your piece- the blind ‘support the troops, no matter what they do’ meme is disastrous and horrific; American military action in the last century has by and large served only the corporate and military-industrial interests of the global elite; American soldiers have indeed perpetrated horrible crimes against native peoples on every continent.
But I also think that this particular post is less subtle and reasoned than it could be. I have talked to you at length about these issues and I know the depth of your reasoning and the extent of your compassion and care for the oppressed peoples of the world. Your activism has inspired me and reminded me not to get so caught up in ‘mainstream’ Democratic politics that I forget the gross failures of the ‘democratic’ system. Yet I feel that your points are much more lucid when you dispense with just a little of the revolutionary bombast and cynical namecalling and back up your (radical, and on the whole quite correct) arguments a little more, well, calmly.
I guess I wanted to write you about this because to my horror I understand not the content, but at least the pretext for the wingnut rants in the comments to your article. As someone who is without a doubt a revolutionary, you have, unfortunately, a much higher burden of proof than pundits blindly parroting the administration line. And if we want to do anything more than talk to the already convinced, we’ve got to present a lucid enough argument that people without the background we have on the subject can follow your line of reasoning. If you give them something to bite on to that’s not as well supported as it could be, that’s offensive without needing to be, people will harp on it and miss the baseline truths you address.
For instance, you write,
Yet another soldier-student said that there would always be wars and someone had to do it. The “it” is killing, rape, and plunder for profit. Some of the soldier-students agreed that military terrorism was thrilling. Stopping and killing people at checkpoints in order to maintain a comfortable lifestyle in the USA was worth the risk of being killed or maimed.
How much of this came from their mouths, and how much of this is your editorializing? I have no doubt that the particular soldiers who visited your class exhibited ignorance and hatred. But what did they actually say? Did they say ‘military terrorism is thrilling’ or did they say they got an adrenaline rush when they were out on patrol? They clearly didn’t mention ‘rape and plunder,’ although that’s not clear from your phrasing. Nor did they say, ‘it’s worth it to kill people so my family can be comfortable,’ did they?
When you write that
Their plan is to secure the oil, the diamonds, the gold, the water, the guns, the drugs, and the bling for their masters, who they hope will cut them in on the swag,
are you really talking about each and every member of the entire military? I agree with you that that’s the goal for many of the political, military, and business elites who compete to control the world’s resources. Certainly some, maybe many, in the military leadership are corrupt, greedy, and waiting for their cut of the swag. But it’s not like the private cleaning the mess hall or working in the burger king on base is really in any position to take advantage of the plundering of the world’s resources, even if they wanted to.
I guess I’m afraid that in some of this article you’re falling prey to a sort of moral absolutism, that scourge of the radical left. No matter how much we detest the institution of the American military (and I do!), and what they have done in the world (especially recently,) it does not follow that every soldier and every cook at a military base, for instance, is interested in rape, plunder, and profit. Note that I am not dismissing the crimes committed in Haditha, in Abu Gharib, and at any checkpoint in Iraq where innocent people are interrogated, humiliated, or shot, victimization of detainees held without trial in CIA extraordinary rendition torture centers the world over. But some people do join the army out of economic necessity– yes, it’s ‘for money,’ but doing something to get wages, or to get money to go to college, does not automatically make you a criminal. And if you’re a victim of the capitalist system working a dead-end minimum wage job, who wants to go to college, the military has become the escape route of choice. Yes, it’s a bribe, I suppose, but it’s also an attempt to escape from a predatory American capitalist system where CEOs make 400 times what the average worker does. And some people do enlist out of a distorted sense of ‘patriotism’ which is (as you say) intentionally instilled by a complex interaction of sociopolitical factors. But does that make the soldier who is subject to this propaganda automatically culpable for the crimes of his institution, before he or she participates in them? Blame the generals, sure; blame the political and military leadership; blame the moribund media, the asinine and violent entertainment; and of course, spare no effort to blame and punish any soldier who commits these crimes. And of course, teach them, as you do- teach them to examine their “motives, beliefs and actions in an evil, illegal, immoral and unjust invasion,” as you so clearly put it. Ask them to resist, to question illegal orders, or to refuse deployment as Lt. Ehren Watada has done. Or make the argument on a personal level, appealing to their self-interest, that the short term monetary gain is not worth a lifetime of psychological and sometimes physical pain from participating in an unjust and morally bankrupt invasion.
But prejudging classes of people as evil by nature – which is what I am afraid it sounds like you’re doing in this piece- is starting down a slippery slope to the sort of arbitrary groupthink that perpetrated mass persecutions in Communist countries (say, the Kulaks in the USSR in the 30’s, for example). Now, obviously, I know exactly where you’re coming from. I know the kind of abuse you’ve been subjected to for speaking truth to power for your entire adult life. I know that the soldiers and future soldiers in your classes were probably insufferable and rude and may have sounded incoherent and brainwashed. But I think your argument, and your article, would have a lot more power if you let the statements of these military men and women speak for themselves.
We have the tendency on the Left to write from the perspective of the already convinced (because we are). Since we have discovered that so much of the accepted historical narrative is a lie, we are wont to make grand statements that make a point, but don’t stand up to a rational and thorough inquiry. And when we’re preaching to the choir, this exaggeration to make a point is an effective argumentative style– the cynical phrasing like ‘will kill for booty’, the conclusion-then-supporting-evidence approach, the tongue-in-cheek hatred for oppression and suppression of objective truth.
But if we’re trying to speak truth to the masses, that approach will give fodder to those who hate us, and won’t convince many that don’t already understand where you’re coming from.
< snip >
The beauty of blogging is that it’s a community, an interactive enterprise. And when you post a radical revolutionary piece replete with harsh criticism of the American military and the military-industrical complex, you’re going to get hammered by the right wing. So I guess I just want to make sure that we’re ready for that hammering, and make sure we you haven’t made any claims that can’t be sufficiently backed up by the available evidence. You have enough to go on without reaching too hard.
Ok, so I guess there is some moral absolutism in my own Weltanschauung– I firmly believe that the Left is right, and the Right is wrong. I believe that theirs is a worldview constructed largely on lies and prejudices. But I’ve also talked to a lot of wingers and moderates who are curious and willing to listen, especially since the 2006 election and since Iraq became the disaster we all said it would. And if we want to change the world, we’ve got to speak to those who might be willing to listen.
Yours in Peace and Solidarity,
(mrbubs)
So, do you guys have any thoughts? What is the best way to engage moderates and wingers in rational debate without compromising our views? Is this kind of criticism of our military so hurtful to our cause that it should be disavowed by mainstream democrats?
ALSO: I’m new to BooTrib, and I’m not sure if this is entirely appropriate for this site. Please let me know.
Crossposted in orange.
