Si vis pacem
A phone call yesterday asked me to
donate to the Legion for the production of tribute books honouring
veterans, the books to be placed in school libraries and other
places. My donation would also support Leadership Training Camps, she
said. I declined and told the woman on the phone that I'm a pacifist
and not keen on supporting camps that promote military thinking and
habits. She said something about defending freedom, etc. and then
hung up on me as one does when one feels offended.
I thought I was being at my civil best.
I've read the guidelines for
participants in these Leadership Training Camps. In effect, they're
boot camps for kids: uniforms must be worn at all times, neatness and
cleanliness of quarters will be enforced, punctuality mandatory,
alcohol strictly forbidden, etc. Put in its best light, it's
self-discipline training. Another point of view would characterize it
as obedience training.
Military “leadership” is not the
same as civilian leadership. A military leader most needs to conform
to the rules, and be able to cause his/her juniors likewise to
conform. Wars can't be fought if the combatants take initiatives or
fall prey to the temptation to be creative.
In effect, military training has as its
first objective the automatization of people, to undo the liberal
arts education so central to our schools and colleges. Put
anatomically, to erase brain pathways that facilitate critical
thinking and replace them with brain pathways that make obedience and
conformity behaviours habitual.
Proper education includes both training
for citizen conformity and
for the exercise of logic, individual initiative and creativity. It's
a balanced curriculum that's part boot camp and part personal
development, sort of. The contributing citizen obeys traffic laws but
does his/her own thinking about the myriad of issues that surviving
throws up. When the balance is understood and embraced, you have a
contributing citizen; when obedience and conformity dominate, you
have a soldier.
Si
vis pacem, para bellum, is
a Roman/Latin adage that translates, “If you want peace, prepare
for war.” Another saying—Dulce
et decorum est pro patria more—is
likewise a bit of insidious, ancient propaganda aimed at putting a
shine on the senseless, bloody, evil thing we call war. It's not a
sweet and honourable thing to die for your country as the second
aphorism claims. More accurately, it is the bitterest, most
disgusting thing to die as cannon fodder for power-hungry, arrogant,
greedy leaders who stand to benefit from virtually every aspect of
armed conflict. The glorifying of the military life is, at the very
least, synonymous with “putting lipstick on a pig.”
I
have to wonder, sometimes, whether or not the holy book of Christian
faith—the Bible—has something specific as it's central theme and
aim. If on a test I was asked to enunciate that theme and aim in a
single sentence, what would I write? Dulce
et decorum est pro patria more is
probably not it, although whole swaths of the Old Testament seem to
support battle valour as a high virtue. Asked to do such a summary,
and after thinking for an hour or two with my pencil poised and
ready, I suspect I would write something like, “Human life is a
precious gift, but tenuous and easily lost to carelessness and
ignorance, so to make the best of the life we're given, only
cooperation, kindness, just practices and merciful interaction will
serve.” Then, I'd probably go at it with the other end of my pencil
. . . and return to scratching my head.
For many evangelicals and fundamentalists, a transaction called
“being born again” lies at the core of the meaning of Christian
faith. Unfortunately, that formula can quite literally serve to write off
human life on earth as a time of waiting for a better life promised. It can minimize the commitment to the earth and its people, including the wars that plague humanity. Analogous would be the living in a run-down house but
doing little to repair it because a benefactor has promised a mansion
in the indeterminate future.
But why these thoughts in a polemic against war, against the
honouring of warriors, against the preparation and training for
military conflict? Much as we would wish it not to be so, people
and cultures claiming to honour “the book” are heavily implicated
in the great conflicts: the world wars of the last century, the
crusades and the usurping of land and the destruction of cultures
through colonial conquest, for instance.
Militarism, seems to me, is to cultures what opium is to individuals,
a tantalizing but false promise. If Jesus were alive today, he'd see the crusade to
rescue the world from both to be of the essence of his mission, I think.
So, don't expect me to contribute to boot camps for kids anytime
soon.
Peace camps? Of course.
Comments
Post a Comment