The problem I have with Anzac Day is that it doesn’t distinguish between good wars and bad. It was inaugurated by a bad war and virtually all the wars that Anzac Day is used to commemorate were not just or worthy. There were basically Australia currying favour with its big allies by attacking other countries: Turkey, Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan. These episodes are shameful, and should be an occasion for accusing the criminality of these state actions, not mindlessly praising them.

The Anzacs weren’t defending Australia, or even Britain from unprovoked aggression. Rather, they were the unprovoked aggressors, attacking a country on the other side of the world that had never offered us any harm; as part of Churchill’s hare-brained scheme to attack Germany by way of the Black Sea – how daft is that? Only someone who had no concept of paying any of the costs himself could have proposed it.

The diggers who took on the Japanese at Kokoda were defending us against unprovoked aggression. But that does not justify Anzac Day because again, other greater moral bads eclipse that great moral good.

Anzac Day is also used to propagate the moral falsehood that people are ‘serving their country’, and that participating in mass murder is okay, so long as it’s the state that’s sponsoring the activity for whatever reason it feels like. A classic example is the war in Iraq – remember the WMD fraud? Bush, Howard, Blair – they all belong on the gallows for this enormity.

And as for democracy, since it is the form of government that has plundered its own citizens to fund these unjust wars, and our policy now is endless war on enemies the state hasn’t even bothered to identify, it’s not much of a recommendation, is it?

The whole point of fighting for our freedom from fascists was so we *don’t* have fascist governments. But take a look at mainstream politics in the western world! The orthodoxy on both sides is that government has and should have unlimited power to poke its nose into any and every area of life; that government should control the economy, and since it can’t do it directly without causing social and economic collapse, to do it by permitting, sponsoring, controlling, subsidising and milking private businesses. That’s what fascism *means* folks!

ABC's Q&A program ran a special on last ANZAC Day and it was one of the best programs I have even seen on the subject, especially the responses by General Cosgrove.

Here it is in video or transcript:

http://www.abc.net.au/tv/qanda/txt/s2877002.htm

"To conclude, regardless of the importance of Australian wartime stories, we should take seriously claims by Marilyn Lake and others of a “militarisation” of Australian history."
One could take seriously Marilyn Lake's and others claims if they were indeed more than just claims and assertions.
"The narrative of Australian history needs to be broader: telling also of Australian egalitarianism and democracy; and also of the struggle for recognition and justice amongst Australia’s many-varied communities.
The fight against fascism was a crucial one, but we should not harbour illusions about the nature of other conflicts: allowing them to be rationalised behind a veil of nationalism."
These are opinions and assertions but what have they to do with the "militarisation" of history? Who is doing this "militarisation"? Who is rationalising the "nature of other conflicts"? Where is the evidence?
I would have thought committed social scientists would concentrate on providing this evidence to support their claims instead of just making unfounded assertions.

Re: 'militarisation of history': It's a matter of emphasis... That viewing our history mainly through the prism of our past military engagements, is exclusive of other aspects; and when not communicated critically, can result in an uncritical national pride which is blind to complex issues surrounding war.

For instance - the colonial undertones of the Vietnam conflict: and its brutality and cost. Or the strategic dimensions of the Iraq conflict: obscured behind concoctions about WMDs...

The point is that we have a responsibility to retain a critical disposition when it comes to war: where human lives and human suffering are at stake. Supressing critical voices is against the interests of the ordinary people who may one day be the 'fodder' for this or that military conflict.

Criticism is the defence of ordinary people in the face of lies and brutally pragmatic geo-politics.

Tristan, I don't think Lake and Reynold's book goes far enough. I think we participate in wars (and have done since 1885) as part of our ruling elite's need for an umbrella power (the UK and then the US) to protect our own expansionism in the region and our expansion through that power against other competing powers more generally (ie against China now).

Young working class kids pay the price, sometimes with their lives, for that insurance policy of imperialism. As I argue in my article The myth of Anzac Day, (http://enpassant.com.au/?p=7051) the whole point of Anzac Day is to cover up the reality that we workers fight for their (the bosses') profits.

"Supressing critical voices is against the interests of the ordinary people who may one day be the 'fodder' for this or that military conflict. "
Who in Australia is suppressing these "critical voices"? The universities? The government? Curriculum writers?
When did this suppression start?
What are examples of this suppression?
"viewing our history mainly through the prism of our past military engagements, (is) exclusive of other aspects"
What historians of the last 50 years have engaged in this "history"? Can you provide examples?
Now Tristan if you can answer some of these questions with evidence then we are starting to examine history. Otherwise we might as well be pontificating over a few beers at the rubbity.

Supression doesn't have to take the form of literal infringements on freedom of speech. It is rather that all kinds of perspectives are excluded from mainstream discourse and culture. If you want alternative opinions you usually have to go in search of them. In this ways some perspectives are excluded. On Line Opinion in its inclusiveness is more the exception than the rule.

Cornflower: Thanks for that link:

http://www.abc.net.au/tv/qanda/txt/s2877002.htm

It was really interesting. General Peter Cosgrove was outstanding.

Tristan your article is interesting. In recalling the hardship of your grandfather's experience you might be interested in a parallel presented in this case:

http://www.petition.fm/petitions/helpfred/0/1/

"The point of these stories is to emphasise the extent of the endurance amdist suffering of Australian POWS: soldiers and nurses. The spirit of mateship, especially: of camraderie between soldiers in intolerable conditions; ought never be forgotten. For women, these stories are also crucial: the Second World War was a time of transformation and of perseverance amidst hardship for women as well as men. “Total war” mobilised and impacted upon the lives of women as never before."

Yes, ANZAC day is about - endurance, as well as courage, in the face of evil.

I too think that our national stories can be more inclusive, but I don't see any reason to diminish our ANZACs or their achievements in order to give due acknowledgment to others. All the additional hype from the likes of Henry Reynolds gives me the pip quite frankly. If I read anything of his again I would be checking the references VERY carefully. I also need to add that I have NEVER heard anyone say, much less has it been widely said, (as quoted from Henry Reynolds): "In fact, there are many, many people who will say the nation was born on the shores of Gallipoli. Now, this, I find deeply disturbing..."

Well I find his confabulations deeply disturbing.

I agree with other critics that war is often motivated by economic motives - HOWEVER - we discern that with the benefit of hindsight. That's one of the values of historical enquiry - to help us learn from the past. As such we may well bag out the forces that determined the situation in which people found themselves battling for survival - but that doesn't mean we shouldn't respectfully remember that those individuals, in the context of their time, did their very best with the noblest and most generous of intentions

There's a quaint saying in Nui Dat, in Phuc Toy province, home of Aust's Task Force (1962-72) " Uk da loi cheap charlie. Number ten " translated : Australian's are cheap white trash. The rest is self explanatory.

Intrepid Lt.Col John Bullen ( RMC.Duntroon) chronicles his time in Vietnam in a book." Capt Bullens War ", edited by Paul Ham. Publisher HarperCollins.

It wasn't meant to be a literary masterpiece. It describes the antics of the Officer's Mess and the grunts. His War, like all wars is horrific. If anything, he openly describes the seedier side of young conscripts thrown into another Country's War, and how they found the strength to cope in a Foreign environment. Many didn't. Others returned home physically and mentally drained/wrecked. One a VC winner, became an out-and-out alcoholic, and a social outcast-dropout.

Rehashing Capt Bullen's mea culpa,it seems they lived a life of Riley - wining and dining on crab and French wine. Jollying all over Vietnam to ease his boredom; bedding nursing sisters ; boozing till paralytic; visiting massage parlors; watching the latest movies; attending court martials; enjoying the Oz concerts; calling on brothels; relaxing in the beach resort at Vung Tau.

War is Hell !

Tristan's article is a trenchant reposite to androgynous Anzac Day debunker Marilyn Lakes. History lecturer at La Trobe Uni, and until her expose in the Age, anonymously hidden behind the ivory white towers of Academia. Pugnacious ML strenuously objects to the glorification of the Anzac ethos. Maintaining, it's a macho thing - even as women served in all our Wars. Among other things, she wants the Constitution changed. Go Republic, and all the millions poured into DVA, RSL, Legacy etc to commemorate A Day, rescinded. Predictably, she caught the full blast and bucketing, from all the shock-jocks in Melbourne. They screamed derogate bloody murder. Calling her despicable unprintable names. Asking for her resignation, Party poopers ?

Tristan impugns on Oz's Wars : " threaten our rights, lives and liberties; the human cost involved. Lamenting, the incarceration of POW's. The good fight for the British Empire etc ".

cont..

I think that Anzac Day is good as a day of remembrance but i detest the way it is hyped. I dislike the way people say that we have the Anzacs (and other war veterans) to thank for the freedomes we have in Australia or that the "nation was born on the shores of Gallipoli". It's almost like an untouchable subject and anyone who questions Anzac day is berated or considered "UnAustralian".

GG Quentin Bryce: " never let go of Anzac Day ". Over 7000 Kiwi's and Ozzies attended the Gallipoli ceremony at Anzac Cove. DVA sent a delegation of over 350 bureaucrats, who with the GG, traveled first class, via London, Paris, Rotterdam etc a veritable Cook's tour. Veteran's meanwhile are penalised for earning too much on their exiting 20 year service pensions. C'est la vie.

Every year, since the Turk's modernised the scenario, hordes of pilgrims descend on Gallipoli. Cheap charlie's, they sleep overnight among the graves, huddled in hoodies, parkas. and human warmth. The Turk's complain it takes an army of workers, and garbage disposal trucks to remove 20 tonnes of refuse each and every year ! Paid enormous sums to write, we have produced more Phd's in History, then any country Worldwide. Every regurgitated issue, is becoming more bizarre, with claims of gallantry, heroism, masculanity and hero worship, for children to aspire to ? A lie, embellished to gargantuan proportions to proliferate folklore, to what end ?

Meantime, the tabloids ran stories of youths in Victoria, desecrating cenotaphs, purloining Flags, and creating maniacal havoc. In the ACT, youths dump rubbish, defecate, and paint graffiti on memorials. In Brisbane, youths try to douse the ' eternal flame' by peeing, then fornicating at that holy-of-holiest shibboleth, euphemistically called the Shrine of Remembrance. The media are told to kill the stories.

Whether a myth or folklore, the perpetuation of the Anzac Legend is here to stay. It may come as a surprise, but historian Charles Bean first coined the word " Anzac", to personify the spirit of the two Country's at Gallipoli. They fought separate campaigns. No other Country celebrates the ghastly disaster, even though 7 other Countries participated. Our casualties were less than 40 % of the United Kingdom. Less than France and India. In total 392,500 lives were lost or wounded. A horrendous waste of Human resources and a stomach-churning travesty.

Civilians, journalist, historians, Academia etc cannot differentiate between History and Folklore. Every year, Library's are inundated with newer phantasmagoric publications extolling and glamorizing War. Making hero's on
cont..

exaggerations, built from diaries, battalion histories, and fanciful adventurers seeking fame and fortune. Paid enormous sums to write, we have produced more Phd's in History, then any country Worldwide. Every regurgiated issue is becoming more bizarre, with claims of gallantry, heroism, masculinity, and hero worship, for children to aspire to ? A lie, embellished to gargantuan proportions to proliferate folklore, to what end ? Tunnel vision or rose coloured glasses ? Do we become orgasmic and dream rhapsody at our sanitised past ? Issues jam packed with bibliographic references, plagiarised from other books and used to lend an air of authenticity is not only deceitful, it's patently criminal and gives authors no credit. Since Colonization, the Nation's Political luminaries have mawkishly followed in Mother England's Empire building, recklessly imperiling the lives of the Nation's cream of strapping young men then and now. In all candor, one would think we can learn from our past ?

Realistically, not only are we distorting facts to enrich our sanitised History, we now have to contend with film producers and directors, hogging the limelight, ala tinsel town ? Million dollar extravaganzas, replete with million dollar tax and gratuitous grants and incentives, are encouraged to stretch the limits of fantasia, and produce films in the War genre, cozen in Nationalistic euphoria !

Changi POW camp was a kindergarten compared to the Thailand / Burma death camps. Many Australian servicemen from Changi, initially transported by rail, were frog marched to many camps along the route, where they perished like flies. The so called Bridge over the River Kwai, became a film epic, with Alex Guiness, and Bill Holden. Over 16,000 died while building the Death Railway to Burma, of which the bridge was only a small part of. At the Military cemetery at Kanchanaburi. Thailand. Thousands of Allied servicemen are interred. Although the number of POW's who died during the Japanese occupation is horrifying, the fatality rate of laborers i.e Thai, Burmese, Malay, Indonesian and Chinese, were much worse - estimated at over 100,000 coolies died in the area. Their graves are unmarked.

Attention seeking
cont..

war stories from hearsay is evidence not recognised in a Court of Law. It must be corroborated and verified by credible witnesses. Unless the criteria is met - all the flag waving, mantra chanting, catchy slogans, and hula-hula gyrations are inadmissible. Unfortunately much of our History is in this category.

Despite the hubris, and Officer's testimonials of which most of our History is based upon, and securely closeted in the National Archives, State Library's, AWM, RSL's and mess's across the Nation, the treasures at best, may be suspect.

Given,it's a human characteristic to aggrandise events. People in general exaggerate a thing or two. Spend a day at your local Magistrate's Court, and you will blush at the furphies told under oath. No wonder the Judges are so screwed up. They cannot ( in all truth ) decipher the truth from the chaff. To add to the defendent's credibility, they are told to dress in suits and their Sunday best. Thus emboldened, their presentations may sway a sworn Jury, but hardly raises an eye-brow from the Bench.

To reiterate, sotto voce: War is Hell !

Growing up in the late 70's early 80's Anzac day didn't have the popularity it has now. At the time i played in a brass band and marched every year. I was taught that it was a day to remember the loss of life in war and to never forget that war was an atrocity and sould be avoided at all costs. Also it was a day of healing for the veterans.
Today it has been transformed in to a day of nationalist pride as has that other day of national misbehaviour. It seems to now be used more to sensationalise wars with stories of heroism and great battles we won against the odds.
The time has come to return to the more traditional values of Anzac day.
Remember in war people die. not just soldiers but innocent children, woman and men. massive cost to our nations in terms of human life, social healing and cost.
Most wars do not have to be fought, they are based in peoples fear of things they don't and won't understand. They destroy the lives of the soldiers and families in the war zone.
History shows us that rarely are the problems fixed through war, rather they are just put off to a latter date when a new generation can fight another war over the hate of their parents.

Anzac day for me is the day I remember 3 mates, & a couple of acquaintances who died maintaining our defence capacity, in PEACETIME.

I also think of those who have died in peacekeeping efforts, & disaster relief operations. All these people were serving our country, in a way that even our bleeding hearts should approve of, but are never mentioned.

I'm the grandson of a man of Irish descent who went to jail for his activities when opposing conscription in NZ during world war one. He beat up two 'special constables' bought in to quell the anti-conscription demonstrations.
I'm the son of a man who held, until the entrance of Japan, that the war with Germany and Italy was merely another European or English war and no business of NZ.

I think they like me appreciate and respect the committment of other NZers and revere the memory of those who suffered.

I think they like me would say you lefties should shut up and just bloody well leave ANZAC Day alone.

You've done your bit and cheapened it enough this year by trying to turn into just another bloody long weekend holiday.

Oh and Tristan NZ and Australia didn't fight as a single Corps in either war. They were separate Corps. The name ANZAC had it's origins in a newspaper headline.

And if you think I shouldn't comment because of the attitudes of my father and grandfather ... well the record some of my uncles and of my mother's family is quite a different story.

Australians and New Zealanders did fight together in the Australia and New Zealand Army Corps. (see below) I'm not certain, though, whether NZ soldiers fought in other units in WWI as well.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_and_New_Zealand_Army_Corps

Try Foucault's 'Society Must Be Defended' to see the role of war in our global community.... it's just another hegemonic tool in the toolbox of power.

And the goons that glory in displays of war, pretending they are simply 'honouring the fallen' are poor deluded fools who willingly, and gleefully, help to perpetuate the grip around their own necks, while tugging furiously at their forelocks, and thanking Dinsdale for being so generous in nailing their head to the floorboards.

The rush to Turkey to be 'on the beach' makes me wonder if these people have ever heard of that film, and its very gloomy message...about the war that is yet to be fought out, the one so many remain eager to undertake.

Like so with the need to experience the Kokoda Track to better 'know' what 'the lads' went through... why not just join-up and get a taste of the real experience, I wonder?

Ah no, living vicariously is all that is really wanted by these people.

I have not read the book, but I did listen to Reynolds interviewed on, I think, Fran Kelly, while she got hot under the collar and practically called Reynolds a Fifth Columnist, so clearly outraged was she that 'the lads' had been diminished by this long overdue book.

Any sense of perspective has been absent in the ANZAC legend making industry, like, there were far more people than just Australians (and Turks) involved, that this is not regarded as anything but an abysmal failure on Churchill's part in the UK, and the Dardanelles Campaign, as it is called there, barely rates a mention beyond being a failed effort.

It was never 'the making of a nation', but it did make Bean, and it did get more men to sign up afterwards to go to their deaths in Europe, and since of course.

It also helps to make politicians, and provides a place for 'religion' to slip into again today, when there should be no room for that war-mongering activity to be associated with it at all....except to be cursed with war.