Monday, May 27, 2013

It is not (only) the soldier who us given us freedom... a response to the popular poem by Charles Province

I am sharing this not because I endorse it, but because I finally was able to articulate why I do not.
This poem was written by Charles Michael Province in 1970 during a very dark time in our nation's history when some misguided protestors were burning American flags. I have seen it passed around Facebook and the Internet many times since then and each time it seems a bit more dated, harking back to an age of hippies and Woodstock and free love and long hair. I have attended my fair share of protests and most of them are family affairs with people who have jobs and short hair and are just concerned about the future of their country. I have yet to see an American flag burned and were I to see one, I would do my best to stop it or leave. It upsets me when car dealerships fly the flag incorrectly or allow it to become tattered or touch the ground.
Province who wrote much about General Patton might have felt lost in an age where the children of those who benefited so much from the sacrifices of an earlier generation were unwilling to continue dying in a faraway place simply because their government told them that they should. Most of those who prosecuted Vietnam were World War II veterans and seemed puzzled that the rest of the country and the world could not see the fight in Southeast Asia as a noble cause akin to liberating France and defeating Hitler.
But the reality of course is that that metaphor was strained and that not all wars are about freedom, or if so, we are not clearly on the right side of that struggle. At any rate, I am not aware of any war since perhaps the repelling of the unsuccessful attempt to repel the British invasion in the War of 1812 or what became an attempt to abolish slavery during the Civil War that are remotely connected to preserving or protecting American freedoms.
Yes, in World War II, we fought for the freedom of the French and those in the concentration camps we stumbled upon, but we also fought against the freedom of the Estonians, Latvians, Lithuanians, Poles, Czechs, Romanians, Hungarians, and tens of millions perishing in camps across Russia by allying ourselves with Stalin.
Our only ally in the fight at one point, Winston Churchill, had few illusions about freedom - his objective was to preserve the British Empire. The great irony of the war is that it led to that empire's unraveling - 2 years later India peacefully (not through force of arms or the soldier) freed itself from British rule.  The French had a similarly unpleasant introduction to wars of national liberation and protracted counterinsurgency battles that they would lose.
Freedom is a complex thing but it's hard to understand what role the soldier played in freeing African Americans from Jim Crow - not only were the freedom fighters in that struggle unarmed pacifists, but Martin Luther King fiercely opposed the war in Vietnam which he saw as racist and a deep moral rot at the core of America.
Similarly, the Eastern Europeans then later the Soviets freed themselves from communism not because of any violent threats from us but through a largely peaceful, nonviolent wave of demonstrations that showed the futility of having thousands of nuclear weapons if you could not provide freedom and prosperity to your people.
If the soldier is the key to freedom, then North Korea, China, and Russia in Soviet times should have been the freest places on Earth.
Soldiers suffer terribly and for that suffering we should respect them. It is human nature to want to find meaning in terrible suffering and in some wars we can find a thread of something akin to the sentiment expressed in this poem, but most are simply convulsive outbreaks of violence started by those in no danger of suffering the consequences for what they have begun, fought with other people's children.
Maybe on this Memorial Day we should leave it at that.

No comments:

Search This Blog