The Political Physicist

Well, it’s that time of year again. 95 years and 362 days ago we saw the Armistice that ended World War I. This marked the end of the first case technological war, which caused the world to realize the horrors that could be inflicted by industrial-scale killing. It was a horrible, pointless event in which some 16 million people lost their lives. The world, including the victors, reacted in horror to what they had unleashed. We quickly saw the establishment of Remembrance Day, to commemorate the tragedy, and the red poppy as a symbol of remembrance. Of course, as we all know, this was followed two decades later by another, even worse, case of mass slaughter.

I tend to identify as a moderate pacifist. I’m not an absolute pacifist like Gandhi was; I think that violence is justified if it is absolutely necessary for self-defence. I will reluctantly admit that we probably did have to fight in World War II, such was the threat of Hitler.¹ But I do not believe that the First World War was in any way necessary or justifiable. Moreover, I would argue that the Second World War was ultimately the result of how Germany was treated in the Treaty of Versaille and was thus, ultimately, avoidable. As for subsequent wars in which we’ve been involved: I can’t honestly say that I would consider them much (if any) better than World War I.

My relative pacifism results in my having rather ambivalent feelings towards Remembrance Day. These are difficult to put into words, but I’m going to try my best here. While I certainly do think that we should remember the tragedy that was the WWI, WWII, the Korean War, the Gulf War, and Afghanistan, I must say that I have my qualms over how this is done. We are told to be grateful to those who made the ultimate sacrifice to preserve our freedom. But to me it feels wrong to feel grateful to people for going off to kill and be killed. Certainly this is the case in the First World War, where I would argue that the Allies weren’t even that much more free than Germany; just look at the treatment of Eugene Debs in the United States. But even in WWII, the most that I can say for those who went off for war is that their actions were necessary but unfortunate and tragic. To say that I am grateful for those actions would make it sound like I’m celebrating them, which I emphatically do not want to do.

I have been told by one person that we should respect the fact that these soldiers were, rightly or wrongly, willing to give up their lives for their country. But why? We don’t celebrate, in and of itself, the fact that people are willing to give up their lives for their convictions. We only celebrate that sort of martyrdom of we happen to agree with the convictions. We don’t celebrate suicide bombers, after all. So I’m not willing simply to celebrate that soldiers were brave enough to go off to battle. Even if we justify their actions by saying that they were misled, I still don’t think that justifies any feelings of gratitude. Pity, perhaps, but not gratitude. I can’t even bring myself to feel respect for that, as doing so feels like it would be to endorse uncritical obedience.

I guess what I’m saying is that Remembrance Day asks us to celebrate the sacrifices made by soldiers without ever questioning why those sacrifices were made. It assumes that the wars in which we engaged were just. Worse still, it often becomes a celebration of military history. In Canada in particular, we are told about how the battles at Passchendaele and Vimy Ridge saw the “birth of a nation.” Well, the Canada that I would consider to be my country (if that idealized country has ever actually existed) was not born in any battle. It was born in the establishment of trade unions, the development of our shared public infrastructure, the creation of medicare, our rejection of the war in Vietnam and later Iraq,² the writing of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. I think that most Canadians perceive ourselves as being fairly peaceful, nonviolent people. So why should we consider these battles to be the birth of our nation? Why should a military event be given such an important role in our history when the Armed Forces play such a small role in our culture?

But my bigger problem with Remembrance Day is how it relates to the wars that are going on now. There is, of course, a “support our troops” message. Now, one could argue that even this is objectionable, as the Armed Forces are basically salaried killers. I’m not going to get into that here. In any case, no matter what my objections may be to the Armed Forces, I’d still like to see the troops come home safely. In fact, to me, the best way that you can support our troops is to demand that they come home. But “support our troops” always seems to have a strong subtext of “support our wars.” When I was in grade 9, my school attended a “support our troops” rally rather than having our own Remembrance Day ceremony. I think this was related to the fact that an alumnus had recently been killed in Afghanistan. We were assured by the principal that this was distinct from supporting our war. Seven years on, I can’t remember exactly what was said at the rally. But I do recall it being emphasized how brave and noble the soldiers were being. And I distinctly remember feeling that I had been duped into attending a pro-war event. That, to me, is not an appropriate way to commemorate the ending of World War I.

It seems that, rather than being a time to mourn the horrendous loss of life that we see in modern warfare, Remembrance Day has become a time when we are meant to celebrate the sacrifices of soldiers, past and present. Implicit to this celebration is the idea that their violence was justified. Consider “In Flanders Field.” I don’t think that there is a single Remembrance Day ceremony, anywhere in Canada, where that poem isn’t read. But think about the last stanza:

Take up our quarrel with the foe:
To you from failing hands we throw
The torch; be yours to hold it high.
If ye break faith with us who die
We shall not sleep, though poppies grow
In Flanders fields.

It’s asking us to continue fighting. Not to realize the folly of war and lay down our arms, but to persist with it. What’s more, it was written during World War I, which was a pointless war between imperialist powers. Canadian soldiers had no quarrel with German soldiers and I consider them just as worthy of our remembrance. But I don’t recall that ever being mentioned at any of the numerous Remembrance Day ceremonies that I have attended over the years.

All of these feelings are the reason why I haven’t made it a point to wear a poppy in recent years. To be clear, it’s not that I specifically avoid wearing a poppy. It’s just that I haven’t had one with me in Halifax and haven’t made it a point to buy one. I’ve been thinking for awhile that I should get my hands on a white poppy. It seems that it would more accurately convey my mixed feelings about Remembrance Day. I know that many veterans find it offensive and I regret causing offence. However, if they find the idea of denouncing the violence of the wars they fought in offensive, then they are in the wrong and I would not censor myself for their sake.

I guess the point that I’m trying to make is: at 11:00AM on November the 11 ^th we should remember everyone who has suffered in war. But I do mean everyone. We should remember the Canadian and American and British soldiers who fell. We should remember those who lived, but with both mental and physical injury. We should remember the German and Austrian and Italian soldiers. And we should remember the civilians who died as armies marched across the world and bombs fell from the skies. We should remember how horrific war was. We should remember why war should never be allowed to happen again. Lest we forget…