The Glory
of War
by
Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr.
by Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr.
The
bloom on the rose of war eventually fades, leaving only the thorns.
By the time this takes place, most everyone has already begun the
national task of averting the eyes from the thorns, meaning the
awful reality, the dashed hopes, the expense, the lame, the limbless,
the widows, the orphans, the death on all sides, and the resulting
instability. The people who still take an interest are those who
first took an interest in war: the power elite, who began the war
for purposes very different from that which they sold to the public
at the outset.
Thus
does the American public not care much about Iraq. It is not quite
as invisible as other nations that were the subject of national
obsessions in the recent past. Hardly anyone knows who or what is
running El Salvador, Nicaragua, Haiti, Libya, Serbia, or Somalia,
or any of the other formerly strategic countries that once engaged
national attention.
In
fact, the president of Nicaragua, Enrique Bolanos (never heard of
him, huh?) is visiting the White House next week in hopes of soliciting
support for the upcoming election, which could prove to be dicey
since the old US nemesis Daniel Ortega is running and gaining some
support on a consistently anti-US platform. Should he win, one can
imagine the White House swinging into high gear about how Nicaragua
is harboring communists, er…terrorists. Or maybe not. Maybe he will
rule the country and never make a headline. It is all up to the
state.
Why
the state goes to war is not a mystery at least the general
reasons are not mysterious. War is an excuse for spending money
on its friends. It can punish enemies that are not going with the
program. It intimidates other states tempted to go their own way.
It can pave the way for commercial interests linked to the state.
The regime that makes and wins a war gets written up in the history
books. So the reasons are the same now as in the ancient world:
power, money, glory.
Why
the bourgeoisie back war is another matter. It is self-evidently
not in their interest. The government gains power at their expense.
It spends their money and runs up debt that is paid out of taxes
and inflation. It fosters the creation of permanent enemies abroad
who then work to diminish our security at home. It leads to the
violation of privacy and civil liberty. War is incompatible with
a government that leaves people alone to develop their lives in
an atmosphere of freedom.
Nonetheless,
war with moral themes we are the good guys working for God
and they are the bad guys doing the devil's work tends to
attract a massive amount of middle class support. People believe
the lies, and, once exposed, they defend the right of the state
to lie. People who are otherwise outraged by murder find themselves
celebrating the same on a mass industrial scale. People who harbor
no hatred toward foreigners find themselves attaching ghastly monikers
to whole classes of foreign peoples. Regular middle class people,
who otherwise struggle to eke out a flourishing life in this vale
of tears, feel hatred well up within them and confuse it for honor,
bravery, courage, and valor.
Why?
Nationalism is one answer. To be at war is to feel at one with something
much larger than oneself, to be a part of a grand historical project.
They have absorbed the civic religion from childhood Boston
tea, cherry trees, log cabins, Chevrolet but it mostly has
no living presence in their minds until the state pushes the war
button, and then all the nationalist emotions well up within them.
Nationalism
is usually associated with attachment to a particular set of state
managers that you think can somehow lead the country in a particular
direction of which you approve. So the nationalism of the Iraq war
was mostly a Republican Party phenomenon. All Democrats are suspected
as being insufficiently loyal, of feeling sympathy for The Enemy,
or defending such ideas as civil liberty at a time when the nation
needs unity more than ever.
You
could tell a Republican nationalist during this last war because
the words peace and liberty were always said with a sneer, as if
they didn't matter at all. Even the Constitution came in for a pounding
from these people. Bush did all he could to consolidate decision-making
power unto himself, and even strongly suggested that he was acting
on God's orders as Commander in Chief, and his religious constitutionalist
supporters went right along with it. They were willing to break
as many eggs as necessary to make the war omelet. I've got an archive
of a thousand hate mails to prove it.
But
nationalism is not the only basis for bourgeois support for war.
Long-time war correspondent Chris Hedges, in his great book War
Is a Force that Gives Us Meaning (First Anchor, 2003) argues
that war operates as a kind of canvas on which every member of the
middle and working class can paint his or her own picture. Whatever
personal frustrations exist in your life, however powerless you
feel, war works as a kind of narcotic. It provides a means for people
to feel temporarily powerful and important, as if they are part
of some big episode in history. War then becomes for people a kind
of lurching attempt to taste immortality. War gives their lives
meaning.
Hedges doesn't go this far but if you know something about the sociology
of religion, you can recognize what he is speaking of: the sacraments.
In Christian theology they are derived from periodic ceremonies
in the Jewish tradition that cultivate the favor of God, who grants
our lives transcendent importance. We receive sacraments as a means
of gaining propitiation for our sins, an eternal blessing on worldly
choices, or the very means of eternal life.
War
is the devil's sacrament. It promises to bind us not with God but
with the nation state. It grants not life but death. It provides
not liberty but slavery. It lives not on truth but on lies, and
these lies are themselves said to be worthy of defense. It exalts
evil and puts down the good. It is promiscuous in encouraging an
orgy of sin, not self-restraint and thought. It is irrational and
bloody and vicious and appalling. And it claims to be the highest
achievement of man.
It
is worse than mass insanity. It is mass wallowing in evil.
And
then it is over. People oddly forget what took place. The rose wilts
and the thorns grow but people go on with their lives. War no longer
inspires. War news becomes uninteresting. All those arguments with
friends and family what were they about anyway? All that
killing and expense and death let's just avert our eyes from
it all. Maybe in a few years, once the war is out of the news forever
and the country we smashed recovers some modicum of civilization,
we can revisit the event and proclaim it glorious. But for now,
let's just say it never happened.
That
seems to be just about where people stand these days with the Iraq
War. Iraq is a mess, hundreds of thousands are killed and maimed,
billions of dollars are missing, the debt is astronomical, and the
world seethes in hatred toward the conquering empire. And what does
the warmongering middle class have to say for itself? Pretty much
what you might expect: nothing.
People
have long accused the great liberal tradition of a dogmatic attachment
to peace. It would appear that this is precisely what is necessary
in order to preserve the freedom necessary for all of us to find
true meaning in our lives.
Do
we reject war and all its works? We do reject them.
May
6, 2005
Llewellyn
H. Rockwell, Jr. [send him
mail] is president of the Ludwig
von Mises Institute in Auburn, Alabama, editor of LewRockwell.com
and author of Speaking
of Liberty.
Copyright
© 2005 LewRockwell.com
Lew
Rockwell Archives
|