I'm sorry if this has been done before.

I wanted to start a discussion about the apparent increase in tendency to venerate, in a very sweeping way, the armed forces.

I want to make a few things clear:

1) I do not think the military is innately a force for bad, but nor is it innately for a force for good.
2) I don't think, either, that all people who sign up for the forces are necessarily gun-happy idiots. Quite the contrary - the military has grand traditions and a role to play in peacekeeping and emergency work.
3) I think the wars are wrong, but not the soldiers as a basic rule.
4) I can quite understand the relatives of those in the forces wish to project an image of solidarity, respect and support. That's fine with me.
5) I am not criticising any particular person, group or idea here, more just trying to sound out what is going on, via discussion.

I made this post now after seeing this:



It struck me as being two things: first, for the wives themselves, a halcyon image of the family, and on a personal level, fine - whatever floats your boat.

But it's not just for the wives. It's for us too. It's for society.

Dare I Godwin the discussion, but jesus christ, it's Volkitsch to the extreme! Very conservative imagery, to say the least.

So, to discuss:

1) Do you think there is a significant increase in public, vocalised veneration of the forces? I mean, does anyone have actual facts and figures as opposed to my vague 'feelings'?
2) Is this significantly increased over times of war in the past (say, the Falklands? I wasn't about then, and was too young for the first Gulf also).
3) How does this make you feel, and why?
4) Do you think, like me, that there is something inherently tricky in saying anyone is a 'hero' by virtue of what they are, not what they do?
5) Why can't this be discussed more openly? I've not tried it often, but I have found that whenever I want to talk about my slight unease at the veneration, rather than, say, respect, of the forces (a priori), I feel I have to constantly qualify myself etc etc.

I know I have seen bits and bobs about, but I wanted to talk about it specifically, in here.

_________________
http://redsparrows.tumblr.com

Tommy - Rudyard Kipling


I went into a public-'ouse to get a pint o' beer,
The publican 'e up an' sez, "We serve no red-coats here."
The girls be'ind the bar they laughed an' giggled fit to die,
I outs into the street again an' to myself sez I:
O it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Tommy, go away";
But it's "Thank you, Mister Atkins", when the band begins to play,
The band begins to play, my boys, the band begins to play,
O it's "Thank you, Mister Atkins", when the band begins to play.

I went into a theatre as sober as could be,
They gave a drunk civilian room, but 'adn't none for me;
They sent me to the gallery or round the music-'alls,
But when it comes to fightin', Lord! they'll shove me in the stalls!
For it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Tommy, wait outside";
But it's "Special train for Atkins" when the trooper's on the tide,
The troopship's on the tide, my boys, the troopship's on the tide,
O it's "Special train for Atkins" when the trooper's on the tide.

Yes, makin' mock o' uniforms that guard you while you sleep
Is cheaper than them uniforms, an' they're starvation cheap;
An' hustlin' drunken soldiers when they're goin' large a bit
Is five times better business than paradin' in full kit.
Then it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Tommy, 'ow's yer soul?"
But it's "Thin red line of 'eroes" when the drums begin to roll,
The drums begin to roll, my boys, the drums begin to roll,
O it's "Thin red line of 'eroes" when the drums begin to roll.

We aren't no thin red 'eroes, nor we aren't no blackguards too,
But single men in barricks, most remarkable like you;
An' if sometimes our conduck isn't all your fancy paints,
Why, single men in barricks don't grow into plaster saints;
While it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Tommy, fall be'ind",
But it's "Please to walk in front, sir", when there's trouble in the wind,
There's trouble in the wind, my boys, there's trouble in the wind,
O it's "Please to walk in front, sir", when there's trouble in the wind.

You talk o' better food for us, an' schools, an' fires, an' all:
We'll wait for extry rations if you treat us rational.
Don't mess about the cook-room slops, but prove it to our face
The Widow's Uniform is not the soldier-man's disgrace.
For it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Chuck him out, the brute!"
But it's "Saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot;
An' it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' anything you please;
An' Tommy ain't a bloomin' fool -- you bet that Tommy sees!

Um, are there not women in the army? I've never seen a Military Husbands cd with a picture of a woman in uniform next to her husband who's in civvies.

_________________
MY COMMENTS ARE FROM THE HORSES MOUTH AND ARE ALL FACTS

And despite the unwavering respect they claim to have for every single person to ever don a uniform, they still insist on the term "Our Boys".

_________________
"Now get those trousers off before someone dies!"

The current wave certainly idealises (a particular type of) masculinity. That's partly a response to feminism and to the perceived emasculation of men in the home and the workplace — if heroism is rugged bravery and devoted fraternity, you can find it in coalmines and shipyards but not so much in marketing departments or on the shopfloor of JD Sports. As the pay and status of men's and women's work slowly converges, making 'heroism' an exclusively male preserve is a useful way of maintaining a difference.

There's a lot more to it than that, though. The Prince Harry narrative is important: he's become a symbol of the idea that the forces can bring discipline and purpose to the life of hedonistic young men with no qualifications and a penchant for minor delinquency. The other thing that's new is the sentimentality: partly it's just a continuation of the post-Diana fad for public displays of grief and emotion; partly it's down to the specificities of the engagements in Afghanistan and Iraq.

These wars are particular for several reasons. Firstly, they're not terribly popular. Secondly, it's hard to put a finger on the purpose of British engagement, or on what 'our' aims are. And thirdly, the wars are straying from conventional narrative: it's almost impossible to tell who is winning, at what point we'll be able to declare 'peace', and what exactly that peace will involve. Whereas previous conflicts have used the tragic and heroic stories of individual British fighters to humanise an overarching narrative of national interest — restoring pride in the Falklands, trying to keep an impossible peace in Northern Ireland, etc — that won't wash this time because there is no narrative. British people seem uninterested in what's happening; they (or at least the media) are torn between acknowledging that military power is a source of British influence and prestige in world affairs, and thus has to be exercised; and a sense that the wars they're waging are unwinnable. The media don't like ambivalence. It's far easier to focus on the coffins.

I cant really at to Malcolm's, and Kipling's thoughts.

_________________
Blog...http://itsjustahobby.wordpress.com/

Soon, if we are not prudent, millions of people will be watching each other starve to death through expensive television sets. Nye Bevan

A major factor is the closeness of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
There's three obvious reasons for this that I can see.
1 The advent of mobile phones with cameras. Wars have been filmed for a hundred years but never in such intimate detail by the soldiers fighting them. Also there's been lots of TV journalists embedded on the frontline in a way not seen before (eg Ross Kemp). Mobile phones have also allowed much more immediate contact between the soldiers and home - no more waiting for letters which may be a month out of date.

2 The repatriation of bodies to the UK is a new phenomenon. Wootton Basset and now Caterton give a focal point for regular displays of grief and something to point TV cameras at, as do the the roll-calls of casualties in Parliament almost every week.

3 Also, as Ezinra says, there's a woolliness to Afghanistan and Iraq with a lack of clearly defined objectives and no direct threat to Britain. Afghanistan is also the longest war Britain has been in since Malaya 52 years ago. I think that must be adding to the feeling of pointless waste.

Edited because I can't count to three.

_________________
That subtle admixture of the absurd and the surreally plausible...

I've written on this many times before. Just to add:

The military are now seen as victims of, rather than instruments of, government policy.

The military narrative focuses on individual and emotive issues, rather than strategic, abstract or political ones.

The military has been eulogised as the one part of the traditional establishment that has not failed the public or betrayed it's trust.

The current eulogising began 30 years ago, but evolved fully with the 50th anniversary of D-day.

Many military people are deeply worried about these trends.

_________________
Ten seconds... the pain begins.

Fifteen seconds... you can't breathe.

Twenty seconds... you give up and turn off the Jeremy Vine show.

A couple of random thoughts.

I can remember a number of Navy wives popping up at the beginning of the Falklands war getting most indignant about the fact that their loved ones were going to have to go off to be shot at. So far as they were concerned, joining the navy should mean having a gentle wander round the high seas in a big ship occasionally, it shouldn't mean that you might actually have to do something dangerous. They didn't get a whole lot of sympathy, and to be fair I don't remember anything similar with the army - after years in Northern Ireland they were only too aware that it was inherently a dangerous occupation.

On the issue of open discussion, I was interested that my brother, whose stepson is in the army, had come to the conclusion that it's a bit of a doss a lot of the time, and he doesn't subscribe to the all-soldiers-are-heroes mantra at all. However, I have to admit I've never dared to try to discuss it with his wife.

On the other hand, when the task force got back into Portsmouth after the War to a tumultuous welcome by hundreds of people, I definitely recall a bunch of women in the crowds celebrating by getting their baps out.

No idea what that was all about whatsoever.

_________________
I'm a nasty, violent lefty. You cunt.

A couple more observations:

— This is also happening in the US, and that's perhaps where it comes from. Since 9/11, idealisation of the military has become more overt and more deliberately targeted at young men, eg on football broadcasts and via video-game style commercials. I'm not seeing the same phenomenon in France, even though French forces have intervened in Afghanistan, Côte d'Ivoire and Libya.

— In response to point 2, I think propaganda does ebb and flow with military activity but also with the general political mood. For instance, the 1970s tv series Sailor can be seen as both a piece of nostalgia to mark the end of the British navy's role in securing the empire and as an attempt to focus attention on the one armed force least tainted by involvement in Northern Ireland soon after Bloody Sunday.

I saw a Falklands doc the other night in which RAF and RN vets both separately voiced those thoughts. When they joined up they were confident that the Cold War would never get hot and they would serve out their 30 years without hearing a gun go off in anger. Quite a shock for them when they were told to write their wills and last letters to their wives 48 hours before they were due to arrive in the Falklands.

_________________
That subtle admixture of the absurd and the surreally plausible...

From my experience of soldiers, when I worked in Harrogate (there is a barracks fairly nearby), most privates would be more accurately labelled thugs or feral yoofs by the popular press for a lot of their behaviour. Simply by putting on their combats they magically transform into national heroes! SPORT ARE TROOPES!

If you were in a fight, who would you rather have on your side - a bunch of thugs or some sensitive intellectuals?

_________________
That subtle admixture of the absurd and the surreally plausible...

Well, notwithstanding the false dichotomy and strawman, my comment was more aiming to say that the simple act of putting on a uniform changes the person's role totally in the social narrative.

In a war, I would expect professional soldiers.