Skip to main content

New Yorker letter to editor

(In The New Yorker, 2/4/08, p5)

Jeanne Guillemin, a senior fellor in MIT's Security Studies Program, wrote an excellent letter to the editor regarding how Americans talk about casualties. I'm unable to find a link to a full-text example, but here is an excerpt:

"In wars since 1945, American combat mortality figures have
sharply declined, while the exclusivity of the American claim on memorialization
has intensified, as if U.S. soldiers were the only casualties in Korea or
Vietnam or, more recently, Iraq, and the deaths of many thousands of civilians
killed in those distant conflicts merited no acknowledgment and carried no
meaning. Whose deaths matter and whose do not always tells a great deal about
American politics and culture."

Comments

rjhintz said…
So, what do you think Jeanne Guillemin means by saying, in the excerpt you quote, ..."the exclusivity of the American claim on memorialization has intensified, as if U.S. soldiers were the only casualties in Korea or Vietnam or, more recently, Iraq, and the deaths of many thousands of civilians
killed in those distant conflicts merited no acknowledgment and carried no meaning. Whose deaths matter and whose do not"?

Does "exclusivity of the American claim on memorialization" mean that other countries and other cultures don't recognize their war dead and wounded? Or that Americans don't recognize anyone else's recognition as having value? Or something else?

And is she saying that civilian casualties are not recognized by Americans? A quick Google search on the term "civilian casualties" brings up pages of references. I'm not sure what counts as acknowledgment, but even one website devoted to Iraqi civilian casualties such as www.iraqbodycount.org would seem to count, at least, as minimal acknowledgment.

And what does she mean by saying that the civilian deaths "carried no meaning"? Meaning to whom? What sort of meaning? Clearly there are many people, Americans included, who are deeply troubled by any civilian casualty. The meaning of a civilian death might be said to be seen as a reason to bring an end to the war.

Is there evidence for any of this? Of course, one might say that the very publication of a note with such content in a respected publication is a counter-example to all that she asserts. But perhaps you have a different opinion?
February 1, 2008 at 12:59 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The 2020 Vote: Bending toward justice

The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice.  --  Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. My hero, Dr. King, was wrong about justice. I love Dr. King. His writings and speeches are collected in a book called “A Testament of Hope”. That book was a revelation for me. Dr. King had a moral clarity that is rare in this world. Many of his observations were accurate, wise, and timeless. But the ‘arc of the moral universe’ statement is misleading. We are promised no such experience in this world. In Dr. King’s time, the quote may have been both accurate and wise. King saw the expanding reach of national newspapers and television networks. When the nation, through that new media, was exposed to the reality and brutality of overt Southern racism--then the nation, which believed it shared a common and decent morality, imposed that morality on the South. While Dr. King’s understanding may have been both accurate and wise, it was not timeless. This is where my moral hero comes u...
Post a Comment
Read more

Deferred Maintenance

I once worked at a public university that had a huge 'deferred maintenance' problem. Their major equipment was often 35 years old with an expected lifetime of 30 years. As a result, they were constantly doing repairs and paying overtime, but had little time to do preventive maintenance and little money to make pro-active investments in new equipment. In one dorm, water from bad showers on the upper floors started leaking into the main lobby, and the 'fix' was to drag out garbage cans to catch the water. I was told that repairing the plumbing itself was expensive so it was being figured into the "five-year budget plan." The garbage can fix went on for at least a year. A two-page spread in The Atlantic Monthly (March 2008, p 38-39) calls out our nation's growing infrastructure problem. This is a real 'tragedy of the commons' situation: individuals are not willing to give up more tax money if they don't see a real-time, personal benefit. At the sa...
Post a Comment
Read more

Whose fault are high gas prices?

GM recently announced the closing of several auto plants in North America, primarily those that make large, gas inefficient vehicles. The news anchor began the segment with "Due to high gas prices..." Since everyone's blaming high gas prices for our woes these days, it begs the question "Whose fault are high gas prices?" Your driveway is the first place to look for answers. If your car gets bad mileage, that's probably your fault. Some luck, huh? After that, I blame "the invisible hand." This is the idea that when everyone follows their own self-interest in a free market, everyone ends up better off. Everyone is motivated to work hard and be efficient and produce goods that others want to trade for. Free markets do a fine job of producing wealth and prosperity, but they've really botched the energy situation. For all it's glory, the invisible hand has little strategic foresight. In the 1970s, we learned that America was vulnerable to high e...
Post a Comment
Read more