I had a Sylvia wall calendar once that commemorated dates chosen, and anticipated dates imagined, by the cartoonist Nicole Hollander. Beside one date were the words: On this day the US Congress voted to make old white men eligible for the draft. War became unthinkable.
There has been a lot of talk in the United States recently about the draft: tales of draft boards restaffed, a bill before Congress proposed by a Democrat who wanted to insist that the children of the elite would serve in future wars. It was a symbolic anti-war measure, inevitably voted down, that highlighted the fact that the Bush daughters are no more likely to serve in Iraq than their father did in Vietnam.
Plenty of websites show how many leading Democrats served their country in uniform, and how very few Republicans did. It seems old white men who did not fight are now making up for lost time by getting young people to do so. And surprise, surprise these good soldiers include a disproportionate percentage of non-whites.
My son, who turned 16 in September 2004, was very relieved to hear President George W Bush promise no draft and an all-volunteer army. He was happy to hear Senator Kerry promise the same, although sobered to hear Kerry explain that the army was no longer entirely voluntary: soldiers in some categories already are obliged to serve against their wishes.
Is it because I am the father of a boy reaching military age that I just could not put myself in Bushs shoes when he went to war against Iraq? I just could not imagine how he did it with such equanimity. Does he lack imagination? When you have no personal experience of war, imagination has to serve instead. Hasnt he read enough war diaries? Or was his imagination focused on transforming the Arab world, or on nukes in Manhattan?
Or is it that Bushs religious faith gives him the certainty that he needs? Much is made of this in journalism and web speculations about Bush.
President McKinley famously wrote of the war of choice he started against Spain over Cuba in 1898:
The truth is, I didnt want the Philippines and when they came to us as a gift from the gods, I did not know what to do with them . . . I am not ashamed to tell you, gentlemen, that I went down on my knees and prayed Almighty God for light and guidance . . . And one night late it came to me this way.. (after describing reasons of honour, trade, and security): there was nothing left for us to do but to take them all, and to educate the Filipinos, and uplift and civilize and Christianize them, and by Gods grace do the very best we could by them . . . And then I went to bed, and went to sleep and slept soundly.
Most Filipinos had been Christians for three centuries already at that point. But then McKinley hadnt been very sure where the country was before the gods (and the US Navy under Commodore Dewey) gave it to him. One can argue how good or bad American rule was for them it wasnt the worst imperial experience at all. They were promised eventual independence, and saw much economic and civic growth under the foreign rule. I suppose this is what is meant by liberal imperialism.
It may be hard for most non-American readers of openDemocracy to credit this, but there are a good number of Americans who feel that President Bush is simply too liberal. One charge is that he is pursuing a liberal war in Iraq (the link thanks to Sullivans Daily Dish) meaning one fired by wishful thinking about how swiftly cultures can leave religious and nationalist traditions behind and enter the uplands of enlightenment and democracy.
I dont personally know any liberals who believe in war any more. I wonder if it would even be possible, supposing Americans had not fought its civil war and slavery was still with us, to fight the civil war today. .
Knowing little of Abraham Lincoln I was surprised by Susan Jacobys chapter on him in her Freethinkers. People on both sides of the civil war were convinced God was with them. But its clear that Lincoln was not one of them. Without Jacoby I would not have questioned the Christian websites that claim Lincoln was a believer in the Bible as the Word of God. In fact he was in much doubt, and may not have been a Christian at all.
Responding to Christians who insisted God desired immediate emancipation, Lincoln replied:
These are not, however, the days of miracles, and I suppose it will be granted that I am not to expect a direct revelation. I must study the plain physical facts of the case, ascertain what is possible and learn what appears to be wise and right. In his careful consideration of all sides of the case, he seems more Kerry than Bush. I always assumed there would be a war I would have to fight. There wasnt. I imagine I would have fought to end slavery, or to resist Hitler but thats easy to say. What if I had been as horrified of war as I am now, and had not served? If I believed strongly in God, I might have the courage, like my father, to serve in uniform, or like his father, to be a thorough pacifist. But I am a doubter. Its good to know that even doubters can pursue necessary wars, like Americas greatest president isnt it? What will President Kerry do?
