Bill Ayers speaks out! An In These Times exclusive.

PrintDiscuss
News » October 22, 2004 » Web Only

Why the Vietnam War Still Matters

By Jackson Lears

According to conventional wisdom, we wasted weeks of the 2004 presidential campaign in refighting the Vietnam War. In a literal sense this lament is well justified. Without question there are more urgent matters on our agenda than who did what thirty years ago. Yet the Vietnam furor has persisted, and even flared up again. We can see it in the Sinclair Broadcasting Company’s decision to air the anti-Kerry smear Stolen Honor—first as a documentary film, then as part of a “balanced” news story based on the film. Stolen Honor and the Swift Boat Veterans’ charges that spawned it are both symptoms of the same disease: the collective amnesia that threatens democratic debate in the contemporary United States.

“The struggle of man against power,” the Czech novelist Milan Kundera wrote, “is the struggle of memory against forgetting.” During the twentieth century, control over public perceptions of the past has become an essential strategy for the maintenance of state power. Kundera opened The Book of Laughter and Forgetting by recalling the disappearance of a Communist leader from official photographs after he had been charged with treason and hanged. Anyone who had questioned the regime’s legitimacy could simply be airbrushed out of history. Our postmodern media managers are subtler, but in reshaping the public memory of the Vietnam War they have accomplished something even more impressive. They have erased the experience of an entire generation.

Since the rise of Ronald Reagan, right-wing journalists and intellectuals have successfully sold us a fictional explanation for American defeat in Vietnam. It is a variant of the “stab in the back” story concocted by German nationalists after their defeat in World War I. The American mission in Vietnam, from the post-Reagan view, was a “noble cause” done in by cowardly campus radicals and their allies in the “liberal media,” whose combined pressure on politicians forced the military to fight “with one hand tied behind its back.” During the last 25 years, this rightist fairy tale has seeped into our popular culture—in the regularly scheduled rants of talk-radio and cable-television hosts, in films from Rambo to Forrest Gump, and in the rhetoric of politicians in both parties. By the ‘90s, even liberals were too cowed by this bizarre account of the Vietnam era to recall what actually happened.

Yet for a moment in July, on the last night of the Democratic Convention, it seemed as if one major party, at least, might finally be remembering the truth about the Vietnam War. In different ways, Max Cleland and John Kerry made the same larger point: despite having volunteered for the war, many veterans came to see it as a catastrophic mistake, sustained by systematic mendacity. Opposition to this war was a patriotic service. For a moment that night in July, as Cleland and Kerry recalled their commitment and disillusionment, it looked as if our politicians might finally be coming to grips with the real meanings of the American misadventure in Vietnam.

But that hopeful assumption underestimated the tenacity of the right-wing narrative, as well as its centrality to contemporary Republican strategy. The Orwellian “Swift Boat Veterans for Truth” burst on to the post-convention scene, telling big lies and sowing big doubts about Kerry’s medals. In a predictable display of phony “evenhandedness,” the national media gave the Swift Boat slander equal time with Kerry’s defense, as if lies and truth deserved an even break from a responsible press.

The Swift Boat Veterans (now appearing in Stolen Honor) embrace the “stab in the back” story of defeat in Vietnam. They are enraged that Kerry told the truth about the Vietnam War, as he did in his testimony to Congress in 1971 when he reported the results of the Winter Soldier Investigation. At this investigation, he testified, over 150 honorably discharged, many highly decorated veterans acknowledged their common participation in acts that could be characterized as atrocities or even war crimes. These men courageously questioned their own conduct, and demanded to know how their government had placed them in conditions that encouraged or even required that conduct. They spoke for themselves and their comrades, those who had died as well as those who lay helpless in veterans’ hospitals, forgotten by the prating politicians who publicly claimed to exalt them.

The young Kerry was clear about who was responsible for this disaster. He asked:

Where are the leaders of our country? Where are they now that we, the men [whom] they sent off to war, have returned? These are the commanders who have deserted their troops. These men have left all the casualties and retreated behind a pious shield of public rectitude.

This testimony is simply inadmissible to the sanitized story of the Vietnam War that dominates contemporary politics. The Swift Boat Veterans profess outrage at the very notion that any Americans might have committed atrocities in Vietnam. By focusing on ordinary soldiers and leaving policymakers out of the picture, this stab-in-the-back perspective avoids the larger meanings of that capacious word, “atrocity”—the carpet bombing, the free fire zones, the use of Napalm and Agent Orange—all the government strategies sanctioned by the highest military and civilian authority. Faith in American virtue remains intact, and the erasure of collective memory is stunning. A recent headline in the Village Voice read: “Kerry Was Right: New Evidence of Vietnam Atrocities.“ As if Kerry needed “new evidence” to confirm his own experience, and the experience of his contemporaries! Well, apparently he does.

In contrast to the media legitimating of the Swift Boat Veterans’ lies, consider the discrediting of the essentially accurate CBS report on Bush’s National Guard service. The truth about Bush’s service—or lack of it—disappeared beneath a fog of charges and countercharges regarding the authenticity of several letters written by Bush’s commanding officer, Lt. Col. Jerry Killian. No matter that the colonel’s secretary confirmed the substance of the documents (while asserting that she herself had not typed them.) No matter that the former Lieutenant Governor of Texas, Ben Barnes, admitted publicly that he was “ashamed” of securing preferential treatment for Bush and other wealthy, well-connected young men. The letters could not be authenticated, and that became the story.

The problem here is not that Bush evaded the draft or even that he did so by benefiting from economic privilege. (No one should have to apologize for avoiding that vile war by any means necessary). The problem is that his behavior epitomizes the hypocrisy of the draft-dodging hawk. Like most of his administration, Bush vigorously supported the war while even more vigorously trying to evade it, and ever since his entry into presidential politics his handlers have concealed their candidate’s spotty military record while outfitting him in military costumes and posing him as a courageous Commander-in-Chief, brimming with “resolve.” He has become the quintessential postmodern patriot, for whom the appearance of bravery and command is more important than the actuality.

The acquiescence of the national media allows this pose to work. The draft-dodging hawk becomes an embodiment of heroic leadership, while his opponent “is perceived” (we are told) as indecisive and weak—this man who courageously volunteered for combat, then came home and courageously criticized the insane policies he had seen on the ground in Vietnam. One does not have to be an uncritical fan of Kerry to deplore the absurdities promoted by the postmodern Right. No wonder so many of us, when we encounter the national media coverage of this campaign, feel that we have entered an “Wonderland” world, as the novelist and Vietnam veteran Tim O’Brien said of the Swift Boat controversy—a world where factual evidence is ignored, common-sense perceptions of reality are reversed, and history is refashioned to meet the needs of those in power.

The consequences for contemporary politics cannot be overestimated. Refusal to come to grips with our defeat in Vietnam—to reflect on the hazards of a morally-charged hubris—lies at the core of our current misfortune. Bush’s advisers came of age in the shadow of that defeat, determined to deny its significance by reasserting imperial power on a grand scale, just as German nationalists had longed to do in the wake of World War I. That dream of national regeneration, combined with our collective amnesia, lets the Bush administration ignore the growing parallels between the failed policy in Iraq and the failed precedent in Vietnam: the millennial fantasies used to justify the war; the ignorance of local culture and custom; the reiteration of empty platitudes as chaos looms; the fetish of “free elections;” the soldiers trapped in an impossible assignment—as vulnerable to local hostility as any Western army of occupation has ever been, in any country with a history of colonial domination.

The most important parallel is the government’s inability to tell the truth about the war. The lie at the center of the right-wing Vietnam narrative—the stab-in-the back story—is also central to Bush’s campaign strategy. The belief (against all evidence) that the troops in Vietnam were somehow betrayed by the antiwar movement, rather than by the men who sent them there, remains a powerful rhetorical weapon. It allows Bush and his handlers to equate criticism of government policy with treason—or at best with a failure to “support our troops.” The persistence of this twisted logic underscores the continuing relevance of the young John Kerry’s charge: that the people who have truly abandoned our troops are the policymakers who sent them on a fool’s errand under cover of false claims, and then “retreated behind a pious shield of public rectitude.” They’re doing it again. That is why the Vietnam War still matters.

Jackson Lears is editor of Raritan and author, most recently, of Something for Nothing: Luck in America.

More information about Jackson Lears
  • subscribe to print magazine

  • Reader Comments

    Did anyone see Nightline several weeks ago regarding what actually happened with Kerry in Vietnam? Reporters went to Vietnam to interview survivors of the event who clearly corroborated official accounts. One even said a Swift Boat “investigator” had tried to get him to say something else several weeks before, and abruptly terminated the interview when he would not. Pathetic.

    Posted by Wes Gordon on Oct 22, 2004 at 1:27 PM

    I fought in Vietnam in 1967-68. I was in the 101st Abn and saw almost constant combat in my tour of duty. I am appalled that nobody has stood up to these Swiftboat Veterans and shown them the irrefutable evidence of what John Kerry said on that fateful day was the truth. The Toledo Blade just won a Pulitzer Prize for revealing the fact that the U. S. Army has known about the atrocities committed by servicemen in Vietnam but did nothing about it. If this is not a cover-up then I don’t know what to call it. John Kerry displayed great leadership qualities by taking great risk to himself to bring the truth to light and start the healing process for the nation. He allowedmany veterans to start the journey home. His actions must be viewed in the context of the times, 1971. To try to distort his actions by making us look at them through the prism of 9-11 is going to have a negative impact on many veterans. Yet this is what the Swiftboat Veterans have done. They never saw the same war I saw. I slept on the floor of the jungle in a hole i scraped out of the ground so I could have cover when the incoming started. I don’t remember sleeping in a bed for my entire year. I remember my best friend dying in my arms. This is the Vietnam I remember and the Vietnam John Kerry let me come home from.

    Posted by Peter C. Fraser on Oct 22, 2004 at 3:09 PM

    This is to Peter Fraser - All I can say is “thank you” for your service to our country and for your answer here today on this subject. I think you have said it concisely,without resentment, and a sense of courage to speak out. Thank you!

    Posted by MCM on Oct 22, 2004 at 7:03 PM

    The author of this article must have been raised in lala land.  He hasn’t looked into the alegations that have been made by the Swiftboat Veterans, he just brushes them off.  I have to question the validity of his brushing off the 260 Swiftboat Veterans based on information from two or three personnel who have claimed that all to the stories are lies.  the Swiftboat Veterans include men who had attained all levels of rank within the military from the lowest enlisted through I know at least one Officer grade six, a full Colonel.  The writer appearantly doesn’t want to take the time to review the actions of the two or three who were at one time part of Kerry’s Winter Soldiers.  The writer did not check into the validity of Kerrys comments during his speach before congress in 1971.  Kerry is supposed to have reported only what was given to him by his fellow Winter Soldiers.  If the writer would check the roster of the Winter Soldiers and then check their records, he would find as others in the 70’s found, many of the Winter Soldiers had never been in Vietnam, and a few had never been soldiers at all. 

    Many of the talking points of Kerry say that the men were not on his boat, but I would suggest that there were other men who were there in the same fight.  There were many men who reported on Kerry who were there when he was there, there were officers that defeated Kerry on televised debates during the 70’s and they are still ready to debate him.  Lets give them a chance.

    The Kerry Campaign has demanded the Form 180 be filed for President Bush.  President Bush filed the form and his records are now public.  I challenge Senator Kerry to sign his Form 180 and let the opposition read the results.  I submit that Kerry will not do that, for Kerry failed to complete his three years of Reserve Duty.  Kerry was too busy going to France to meet with the North Vietnamese envoy and the leader of the North Vietnamese Army.  Kerry did not receive his discharge until 1978 and the type of that discharge has not been specified.  He should have been discharged in 1972 after serving his six years of duty.  Why did president Clinton Pardon Senator Kerry as one of his last minute pardons as he left the office of President in 2001?

    Please go back and check the records, find out who the people were, where they served, when they served.  All of the records of both sides of the story and I will then respect what you have written.  Until that time, I will consider your report as one sided and biased, and lacking in the complete detail that a complete report should include.  The report of a biased reporter.

    Dave Weissinger
    Major, Aviation/Armor, USAR, Retired
    Annona, Texas 75550

    Posted by Dave Weissinger on Oct 22, 2004 at 7:33 PM

    Our president, as often as he could appeared with our military as a back drop and reminder of his “commander and chief” status. He mentioned their service to their country, and that they deserve the support of all Americans. But, when these veterans’ return to civilian life with possibly the loss of limbs or suffering any number of other related war injuries this president will reduce their benefits and ignore their post war experience as part of the price of serving their country.
    If you were fortunate to have come home from Vietnam in one piece and you had the courage to speak out against the war after serving with honor, then seek political office - you’re open to assaults on your service and your character by none other than another administration with many people that supported that war but avoided service.
    Veterans from any war have minds, have experiences, have opinions and align themselves with one political ideology or another. So, it’s hardly a surprise to know that there are so called “veterans’ for truth” and opposed to John Kerry and that they are being financed by Republican money. Nothing wrong with that at it’s base but to attempt to dishonor a decorated veteran with innuendo and
    misrepresentations in an attempt to resurrect the debate over the Vietnam war is not only dishonoring to all those that died but all those that served honorably and a complete disregard for the truth!
    We have had a good deal of “support our troops” sentiment expressed by pro and anti war Americans (as they should be) since we embarked on another questionable war but we don’t really seem to care about them except that they are serving our president’s decision to sacrifice as many of their lives as it requires to “stop the threat of terrorism” by invading Iraq, a presumed threat and the hub of terrorism. And those pro-war signs reading: “support our troops” actually means support our president because he believes he’s doing “the right thing!” And all the evidence to the contrary be damned! We don’t want to repeat the “loss” of another war and have protesting in our streets, and anyone that does is in league with al Qeada and providing comfort to our enemy.
    Arrogance, hubris, blind patriotism, and good old fashioned fear are our real enemy!
    Senator John Kerry can’t be thanked enough for his service to this country and for the further display of his character and courage in coming out against that war, and willing to articulate for many of us how wrong the war was before the congress!
    I am a Vietnam veteran supporting John Kerry not only because I disagree with the man in office on Iraq, the environment, social issues, and his lack of appreciation for all those that have died in this war and those that died in Vietnam ( which he supported but was not interested in fighting himself) No, I’m voting for Kerry because he exemplifies more of the American ideals that mean true patriotism and is superior to this president in all regards!.

    Posted by BAM on Oct 23, 2004 at 9:04 AM
  • extended discussion >>>Continued...

    Discussions with more than 5 comments are continued on our special discussion page to encourage continuity and ease of use. There are currently 81 posts.