One Hour’s Stour
Wikipedia has the short, sad story of how Armistice Day – a holiday “dedicated to the cause of world peace” – became, as of 1954, a day honoring the military as such. I regret the change. The US already had Memorial Day for military members killed in action, and Armed Forces Day began in 1950. A third military-focused holiday would already be overkill even if it wasn’t a perversion of the original meaning of November 11 remembrances. As John Quiggin reminds us today, November 11 marks the blessed if temporary end to one of the great calamities – crimes – visited on people by their leaders, and by people on each other. It is meant to be a day dedicated to hating the waste and sin of war.
While the impulse behind Veteran’s Day seems “grass roots” enough, it depended on the assent of the powerful to enact it.You can see why the government would have embraced a chance to change that holiday’s focus. As for me, I’ll exercise my personal veto. Happy Armistice Day.
Comment by nadezhda —
November 11, 2009 @ 10:23 am
I’ve been in London during a couple of Novembers. It’s impossible not to recall the carnage of the Great War for weeks leading up to Remembrance Day. The Poppy Appeal (veterans charity) is everywhere, and a large number of people not only buy but wear the paper poppies on their lapels for a number of days. And then everything comes to a full stop at the eleventh hour of the eleventh day of the eleventh month. There’s a sense of national mourning I find quite moving in a way that US Veterans Day or Memorial Day never strikes me.
Comment by Someone Who Doesn't Want to Lose His Job —
November 11, 2009 @ 10:53 am
Kurt Vonnegut said much the same thing in the commentary of one of his books. (Maybe Slaughterhouse Five?)
Comment by Jennifer —
November 11, 2009 @ 11:15 am
For my daily-newspaper job I’ve had to go to craploads of hooray-for-veterans events of late (and I live in a very blue state), and I am starting to get seriously creeped out by the “Veterans are a spacial breed of human” attitude.
Comment by chris y —
November 11, 2009 @ 11:19 am
And a happy Armistice Day to you, Jim.
Do Americans observe a silence on Veterans’ Day? We did today, even in the office where nobody could observe us. A manager stood up at 11:00 and said, “Silence, please”, and all the phones and keyboards and meetings went quiet for two minutes. It seems the least we could do.
Comment by Thoreau —
November 11, 2009 @ 11:19 am
Jim is wrong.
We have 4 military-focused holidays, not 3. July 4 is in practice a very pro-military celebration.
Pingback by Armistice Day and a Poem | Heretical Ideas Blog —
November 11, 2009 @ 11:57 am
[...] Henley argues that, on this day, we should go back to honoring Armistice Day, which was established to honor “the cause of world peace” and the men who sacrificed [...]
Comment by John Emerson —
November 11, 2009 @ 1:16 pm
This is hand in glove with the “Support the Troops” viciousness, where everyone is obligated to support every war there ever is because otherwise it will hurt the troops’ feelings. Wars aren’t about the troops — if they aren’t about more than that they’re just brutality.
I’ve recently read things about the onset of every American war since 1898, and it’s been discouraging. The same arguments come up every time, and war always wins. (Can anyone else think of a case when the executive and the military wanted a war but were blocked by Congress and public opinion? Maybe I’m wrong.)
Comment by Kevin Carson —
November 11, 2009 @ 2:09 pm
Chris Y.: I used to work in a VA hospital, and someone announced over the intercom: “Let us observe a moment of silence in honor of Veteran’s Day.” Nothing further followed on the intercom, and we were all quiet for a couple of minutes on the assumption that the “moment of silence had begun.” After we’d been quiet for a while, the announcer returned: “We will now begin our moment of silence.” One of my coworkers said “Only the VA could fuck up a moment of silence.”
Comment by doubled —
November 11, 2009 @ 2:45 pm
… and I am starting to get seriously creeped out by the “Veterans are a spacial breed of human” attitude.
Risking your life for the service of others and the ridiculously easy life we enjoy, and getting recognition as being special for doing such, creeps you out?
Would YOU risk your precious life so that others could continue to enjoy their’s?
What has always creeped me out are the haters of our brave men and women in the military. Kinda like when John Kerry smeared the whole force with ‘narrative’ of out of control ‘killing machines’ ‘laying waste to the countyside’ and then later claiming his ’service’ as honorable and a reason to vote him for president. Or Murtha calling our troups ‘cold blooded murderers’. That’s creepy.
Comment by Kolohe —
November 11, 2009 @ 2:55 pm
I’ve recently read things about the onset of every American war since 1898, and it’s been discouraging. The same arguments come up every time, and war always wins. (Can anyone else think of a case when the executive and the military wanted a war but were blocked by Congress and public opinion? Maybe I’m wrong.)
Don’t know about that, but I rememeber reading in Micheal Beschloss’s most recent work about the reverse.
During Washington’s terms, quite a few people were clamoring for war with Britain, which Washington knew would be a unwinnable fight. So when Jay signed the treaty there were quite a few public protests and Jay quipped he could make his way at night up and down the new nation at night by the light of his burning effigies.
Comment by Alex Knapp —
November 11, 2009 @ 3:00 pm
John Adams also fought against the Federalists demands for war against France and Alexander Hamilton’s desire to conquer all of the Spanish possessions in the West. It’s neatly dramatized here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KaWBs46USqE
Comment by Thoreau —
November 11, 2009 @ 3:25 pm
Kindly explain how most of the interventions of the past 50 years actually protect my life, liberty, or “ridiculously easy” way of life.
Comment by Happy Jack —
November 11, 2009 @ 3:44 pm
Kindly explain how most of the interventions of the past 50 years actually protect my life, liberty, or “ridiculously easy” way of life.
The third example should be obvious. There are benefits to living under the wing of a hegemon, as opposed to living under the heel of one.
Comment by joe from Lowell —
November 11, 2009 @ 3:45 pm
I’m sure Jim is quite comfortable with the services held for police, firefighters, and other emergency personnel who risk their lives.
It would appear to be the elevation of one class of life-riskers to demigod status, purely because the manner in which they risk their lives involves killing people, that creeps him out.
Comment by Ceri B. —
November 11, 2009 @ 3:55 pm
Doubled: In addition to Thoreau’s response, which I agree with entirely…
Risking your life for the service of others and the ridiculously easy life we enjoy, and getting recognition as being special for doing such, creeps you out?
It creeps me out a lot to see so much attention to this particular kind of service and not nearly enough to others. It’s very dangerous to say that the fact that a service is sometimes lifethreatening makes it innately higher, more worthy, more honorable than, say, the risks of soul-grinding exhaustion and despair that face those who counsel the victims of rape and assault, the honest cops and prosecutors who try alleged perpetrators and the honest defenders who make the state have to prove its case, and so on.
Lots of work rots the soul whether or not it rots the body, and we trivialize that at our own moral risk, just as we do when we trivialize things like the labor and management skills required to maintain a good civic infrastructure. The people who make bridges and power grids work are on the whole more heroes of mine than soldiers, and not nearly honored enough.
Comment by Jim Henley —
November 11, 2009 @ 4:02 pm
John Kerry????
Comment by Jim Henley —
November 11, 2009 @ 4:06 pm
Doubled, leaving aside what creeps you out, the point of the post, as opposed to various people’s comments in the thread, is that the calendar is already full of days to honor the military.
To be clear, I’m not disassociating myself with any of the comments. But whether we now fetishize the US military in an unhealthy way is a separable issue from the hijacking of Armistice Day specifically.
Comment by Ceri B. —
November 11, 2009 @ 4:08 pm
Jim Johnson is right! Rarum!
Comment by Jim Henley —
November 11, 2009 @ 4:10 pm
Jim Johnson is dead! Jeez, girls don’t know anything about football . . .
Comment by Neel Krishnaswami —
November 11, 2009 @ 4:12 pm
Kerry made the mistake of once flirting with the truth, Jim. Don’t worry, he didn’t plan on marrying her — he settled down with proud advocacy of the security apparatus’s unlimited right to spy on us.
Comment by John Emerson —
November 11, 2009 @ 4:12 pm
10, Kolohe: OK, in the last 100 years have COngress and/ or public opinion ever prevented a war. 150? 200?
Comment by joe from Lowell —
November 11, 2009 @ 4:15 pm
A few years ago, a plumbing and gas inspector for the City of Attleboro, MA went in on a Saturday to observe some work going on under one of the city’s streets. He was killed in an explosion when a gas line was ruptured.
There was no parade for this public servant who gave his life to keep his community safe, and the idea of a plumbing and gas inspectors’ day is ridiculous. Frankly, if one was created, it would probably be an attempt by the municipal governments of this country to enhance their own standing by piggybacking on the sacrifices of the people who actually do the job.
Comment by David —
November 11, 2009 @ 4:21 pm
But whether we now fetishize the US military in an unhealthy way is a separable issue from the hijacking of Armistice Day specifically.
We have an unhealthy fetish for anyone in a uniform at this point.
Comment by mr.fun —
November 11, 2009 @ 4:29 pm
Would YOU risk your precious life so that others could continue to enjoy their’s?
yes.
NOW WHERE’S MY FUCKING HOLIDAY!?!?
Comment by Thoreau —
November 11, 2009 @ 4:36 pm
Sure, but we could probably be neither a hegemon nor under the boot of one and still enjoy the same standard of living. I’ve blogged about this before under the heading “Cheaper just to buy things?” Hegemony might bring some wealth to the politically-connected, but your average American consumer is still going to have to pay market rates for commodities, whether those commodities are sold to us by US companies or foreign companies.
Pingback by More Armistice Day « Matt Zeitlin: Impetuous Young Whippersnapper —
November 11, 2009 @ 5:21 pm
[...] a comment » Jim Henley, Matt Yglesias, John Quiggin, Jacob [...]
Comment by BruceR —
November 11, 2009 @ 5:32 pm
In Canada we have the one day (which is not an actual day off, either) for our vets. I feel no guilt.
And hey, compared to the way Labor Day’s been twisted out of all recognition of what it once stood for, no U.S. veterans need feel guilty either, imho. And hey, if you want to make it “plumbing and gas inspectors day” in your house, joe, well you’ve already got the day off set up for yourself.
Pingback by A day of anger and horror « A Thinking Reed —
November 11, 2009 @ 6:02 pm
[...] reminders of the original meaning of Armistice Day, the reason for the season, if you will. See Jim Henley, John Quiggin, and Jacob T. Levy. Levy in particular gets to the heart of the matter: A [...]
Comment by Dave Leflar —
November 11, 2009 @ 8:44 pm
On this day, I always listen to Tom Russell’s song “Veterans Day”. For me it captures perfectly what I believe to be the essence of this remembrance. If you don’t know the song, its well worth going over to YouTube, searching Tom Russell Veterans Day, and listening for 3 minutes.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lA5HaUkeRoU
Comment by John markley —
November 11, 2009 @ 9:43 pm
doubled,
Lumberjacks, roofers, and construction workers have very high workplace fatality rates. Are they a special breed of human, too? If someone said that they weren’t, would you excoriate them for being creepy haters of the brave men who risk their lives so we can live indoors?
Comment by Mona —
November 11, 2009 @ 10:25 pm
A-fucking-men. And these neocons, neo-liberal or even neo-libertarians who think they are all Wilsonian nobility in their aspirations, should not be allowed to forget what hell WWI unleashed.
Comment by Kolohe —
November 12, 2009 @ 1:12 am
@21 John Emmerson-
No I can’t think of any; wasn’t clear earlier.
Although Congressional actions in the 80’s mitigated but did not eliminate involvement in a Nicarauguan civil war.
There was also the fact that the US basically stayed out of the first Arab Israeli war in ‘48 (leading the Israeli’s to use a great deal of Soviet equipment in that one) but I don’t know the politics of that off the top of my head. And Ike deliberately worked in the opposite direction of the more militarist desires of France and Britain in the Suez Crisis of the 50’s.
Pingback by FM newswire, 12 November – links to old-fashioned journalism « Fabius Maximus —
November 12, 2009 @ 6:04 am
[...] One Hour’s Stour, posted at Unqualified Offerings, 11 November 2009: Wikipedia has the short, sad story of how Armistice Day – a holiday “dedicated to the cause of world peace” – became, as of 1954, a day honoring the military as such. I regret the change. The US already had Memorial Day for military members killed in action, and Armed Forces Day began in 1950. A third military-focused holiday would already be overkill even if it wasn’t a perversion of the original meaning of November 11 remembrances. As John Quiggin reminds us today, November 11 marks the blessed if temporary end to one of the great calamities – crimes – visited on people by their leaders, and by people on each other. It is meant to be a day dedicated to hating the waste and sin of war. [...]
Comment by Barry —
November 12, 2009 @ 12:23 pm
Mona —
“A-fucking-men. And these neocons, neo-liberal or even neo-libertarians who think they are all Wilsonian nobility in their aspirations, should not be allowed to forget what hell WWI unleashed.”
A minor quibble – neonmen (and -women) don’t have any ‘Wilsonian’ impulses; they serve The Empire only. ‘Self-determination’ usually ends up meaning ‘Our SOB’.
John Emmerson-
“And Ike deliberately worked in the opposite direction of the more militarist desires of France and Britain in the Suez Crisis of the 50’s.”
The original comment was whether or not the country had gone to war, when the president and the military wanted one. In that case, the president did *not* war.