-0 C
Elmira
Monday, January 27, 2020
Their View / Opinion

We remember to avoid repeating the mistakes of the past

Remembrance Day recalls the sacrifices of those who served in the military, particularly those who lost their lives in the two large-scale conflicts that shaped the 20th century.

But “Lest we forget” is best applied to remembering the horrors of war, and avoiding them in the future. The ideal way to honour the veterans of past wars is to ensure their ranks are never increased.

That is perhaps too optimistic for a species with a long history of violence, conflict and imperialistic aspirations. Despite all we know, there’s still a sizable group of people who support the kind of power plays and warmongering that generates the smaller-scale conflicts perpetually brewing all over the planet, whether they be the work of petty, power-grubbing tyrants or larger powers still bent imperialism and meddling in the affairs of others.

Wars don’t typically happen in isolation. Those on a larger scale are the result of a host of other factors, from historical grievances to external aggression. Often there’s a build-up of military jingoism and propaganda flaming the fires of war. It’s a tactic that is still employed each and every day by leaders from Russia to North Korea, from China to the U.S., the latter being a textbook case of modern imperialism.

The key to avoiding wars, or at least reducing its likelihood, is an informed citizenry that recognizes the propaganda and refuses to buy into the worst kind of patriotic claptrap. Short of fending off an invasion of your home, there’s little reason for much of the military adventurism of the kind we see continually south of the border. And of which even Canada, certainly not a military superpower, gets mired in from time to time – include on that list the likes of Afghanistan and the missions in the confusing morass that is Syria today.

Recognizing the propaganda angle of much of the jingoism typically involves asking the basic question: who stands to gain? There are the arms manufacturers who profit outright, the same people who own many a politician through lobbying and financial donations. There’s the military itself, which extends its raison d’être. And there are the politicians who cling to or seek power on the back of “strong leadership,” recognizing that it’s much easier to stir up patriotic fervour than to, you know, do something of actual benefit to the majority of citizens.

Refusing to be caught up in all of that is easier said than done, especially during times of real crisis, no matter how the crisis was manufactured. Still, there’s much at stake if we continue down the current road, the massive amounts of wasted money the least of it as we head down the road to a police state and fascism.

It’s not like we couldn’t see the coming threats to our (now ersatz) democracy. Way back in 1961, Dwight Eisenhower spelled it out:

“In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists, and will persist,” he said as he prepared to turn over the U.S. presidency to John F. Kennedy.

Eisenhower, a five-star general who led the D-Day invasion as  Supreme Commander of the Allied Expeditionary Force, knew a thing or two about war, the military and its suppliers. He was also a Republican, but that was long before the GOP became the more corrupted of the two U.S. parties.

Another Republican, albeit nominal, Donald Trump, campaigned on removing the U.S. from military adventures overseas – Eisenhower, the first head of NATO, would not have approved of the isolationist rhetoric – and has fiddled at the margins in what is likely to make the situation worse. Moves such as pulling out of northern Syria and betraying the Kurds are what is likely to make Trump’s impeachment more likely, suggests writer Chris Hedges, who sees the U.S. heading down a road to tyranny thanks to the policies of the military establishment.

“Our democracy is not in peril – we do not live in a democracy. The image of our democracy is in peril. The deep state – the generals, bankers, corporatists, lobbyists, intelligence chiefs, government bureaucrats and technocrat – is intent on salvaging the brand,” he writes in a column this week, noting Trump’s blunder is in crossing this group, putting its profits at perceived risk.

“Trump committed political heresy when he dared to point out the folly of unchecked militarism. He will pay for it. The deep state intends to replace him with someone – perhaps Mike Pence, as morally and intellectually vacuous as Trump – who will do what he or she is told. This is the role of America’s executive: Personify and humanize the empire. Do so with pomp and dignity. Barack Obama – who speciously reinterpreted the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force to give the executive the right to assassinate anyone abroad, even a U.S. citizen, deemed to be a terrorist – excelled at the game.”

In that light, Remembrance Day becomes more than honouring those who paid the ultimate sacrifice in the last century. It’s also about heeding the message that vigilance is needed to avoid sliding into the kind of totalitarian morass that marked much of the 20th century and is on the rise again in the 21st.

The horrific great wars of the past are in some ways less likely to reoccur given today’s massively destructive weapons and geopolitical ties, but we also face greater threats to our freedoms, privacy and autonomy due to technology wielded by corporate greed and invasive, police-state governments, the very definition of fascism so many gave their lives to fight in the Second World War.

To encourage thoughtful and respectful conversations, first and last names will appear with each submission to The Observer's online community. Pseudonyms are not permitted. By submitting a comment, you accept that The Observer has the right to reproduce and publish that comment in whole or in part, in any manner The Observer chooses. Please note that The Observer does not endorse the opinions expressed in comments. Comments on this story are moderated according to our submission guidelines. Comments are welcome while open. We reserve the right to close comments at any time.

We're looking for opinions that count.

Yours. Join in the conversation, provide another viewpoint, change minds with your perspective.

OUR COLUMNISTS

Ongoing privacy woes continue to threaten democracy

Reports about growing threats to our privacy, democracy and very freedom are common. So too is the lack of response from government, which does...

Spending on transit, bike lanes unlikely to pay any dividends

There’s an “if you build it, they will come” mentality to both transit and so-called active transportation (walking, biking) schemes in Waterloo Region. That’s...

Putin the immortal? Probably not

Five years ago somebody posted photographs on the internet showing a man who looked a lot like Vladimir Putin in photographs from 1920...

Downed planes are collateral damage

One of the main causes of death for airline passengers in recent decades is being shot down by somebody’s military. Not the very...

Broadband and bridges, all in the same breath

It’s never been hard to convince rural Ontarians of the value of investing in capital infrastructure. They understand the need for the likes of...

So what’s wrong with a $4 turkey?

Afriend of mine – let’s call her Tara, because that’s her name – visited relatives in Michigan over the Christmas holidays, and noticed the...

Taking a closer look at pike flies then and now

Over the past week or so, I’ve been dreaming of spring and open water, and tying pike flies. If there...

Think of posterity and posteriors when tying flies

This week, I have been making an effort to tie at least one pike fly every day so that when the spring season...

Espionage can be really crappy work

Q.  Based on the most comprehensive inventory of North American birds ever done, their population is A. increasing slightly  B. remaining steady  C....

That you have a phone number can be traced to the measles

Q.  How did an epidemic of measles lead to the introduction of phone numbers? A.  At one time, all phone calls...
- Advertisement -