Fighting Words:

The War Over Language

by Jon Hooten
Mine -- perhaps, ours -- is the first American generation that has yet to experience a full-blown, machine-gun shooting,
prisoner-taking, horror-story war. We youngsters sit wide-eyed while our shaky grandfathers and crusty old uncles tell
tales of enemy occupation, dead buddies, pretty gals and the joy of a fresh Lucky trike on a !uiet rainy afternoon. "o
those born in the late #$%&s and beyond, 'a(is are nothing but cultural extremists )of the *femi-+ or *soup+ ,arieties-,
.ietnam makes a good setting for a summer blockbuster, and the /attle of the /ulge is a corny baby boomer punch line.
imply, the realities of the nation0s major wars ha,e been lost on one -- going on two and three -- generations of
Americans.
"hat0s not to say that my generation has not li,ed through skirmishes, conflicts and appalling battles. "hose of us sitting
in high school during the winter of #$$# watched the air strikes on /aghdad through the glassy eyes of 1'', with 2eter
Arnett and Wolf /lit(er calling the play-by-play. As 3esert torm e,entually became known as the *4ulf War,+ many of
us wondered if this was the future of the genre that we had read about in ##th grade-history class.
5rom now on, it seemed, war would be a few nights of superpower smart-bombing and long-range tanks lobbing shells
into ragtag militias commanded by egomaniacal dictators. 6t hardly seemed worthy of the designation *war.+
"hose of us who grew up after .ietnam simply cannot comprehend the dread that shaped older generations of Americans.
7ur experience of the 4ulf War was an acutely sterile encounter. We watched replays of laser-guided missiles entering
bunker windows, but seldom were we exposed to the sights of actual human collateral. "hough tens -- hundreds -- of
thousands of 6ra!i casualties resulted, the images of precision war games grossly outnumbered the news clips of war0s
grisly human cost. ince many of us ha,e not experienced the sights and sounds of war firsthand, we think about war
rather thoughtlessly. 6ndeed, in our dearth of wartime experience, we ha,e learned to deploy the images of war casually.
"he words of war were once the moral and emotional defense of the nation, corresponding with the real memories and
moti,ations of an embattled citi(enry. As war became less messy and more distant, the language of war in,aded the
common lexicon of America. "hough you may ha,e ne,er noticed it, the extra-ordinary metaphor of war has infiltrated
the e,eryday. )1an you count how many times 60,e used *war words+ in this ,ery paragraph8-
7ur popular culture thinks nothing of in,oking the language of conflict to describe most any topic. 2ick up the morning0s
paper and browse through the headlines9 *Mayor 3efends 'ew /udget.+ *Media /lit( a,es :idnapped 4irl.+ *5armers
/attle ummer 3rought.+ */rowser War ;eats <p.+ *1hamp0s Left ;ook =ight on "arget.+
1onsider again the numerous, non-militant ways in which the word >bomb0 is used9 *5rat brothers get bombed on a
aturday night.+ *?our new car is >da bomb.+ *3id you see that comedian bomb on Letterman last night8+ *"he
!uarterback threw a long bomb to win the game.+
While we ha,e hapha(ardly sprinkled our language with war0s metaphors, is it possible that we ha,e collecti,ely
forgotten how to think clearly about the literal phenomenon8 1an the collecti,e linguistic turn from the literal to the
metaphorical be without conse!uence8
"hroughout history, wars ha,e usually followed a certain pattern9 "hey ha,e generally in,ol,ed elaborate, enduring
campaigns between at least two somewhat e!ual forces@ they ha,e resulted in mass casualties@ and -- this is the most
important part -- they ha,e some sort of conclusion. "hat0s no Oxford New World definition, but it seems to be a
characteri(ation on which most could agree, at least in the con,entional sense of the phenomenon.
3efinition aside, the latter half of the A&th century has seen a proliferation of non-war-like wars. "he war on po,erty that
Lyndon Bohnson waged in the C%&s was an elaborate public policy initiati,e. "he war on drugs that swelled in the CD&s and
CE&s became a tsunami of agencies, non-profit organi(ations, police action and international diplomacy. "he 1old War,
fought with national ideologies, economic posturing and infinite defense budgets, festered without any combat or mass
casualties )at least among the superpowers- throughout the latter half of the A&th century before finally coming to a head
in the mid-CE&s.
'ow, after a decade0s respite of new wars, we ha,e another one on our hands9 the war on terrorism.
After that inconcei,able morning in eptember A&&#, our media-sated political culture was !uick to place the blame on
those radicals who ha,e become known as *the terrorists.+ oon after, the war on terror was a go. 2resident /ush
promptly assembled his posse to round up the scoundrels who had done this -- *Wanted,+ we were told, *dead or ali,e.+
"he weeks and months following that day were a slow and deliberate escalation of the war on terrorism, beginning
internally with beefed up airports and 5/6 round-ups, then spreading -- in a ,iolent and explicit way -- abroad in
Afghanistan.
5or se,eral weeks, while the <nited tates bombed that impo,erished faraway land, the *war on terrorism+ became
known as the *war on Afghanistan.+ Fuickly, this new war began to look like a war that the president0s father fought #&
years earlier. "hough similar to the 4ulf War in many ways, the mission in Afghanistan was ,ery different. While /ush
the Glder relied hea,ily on turkey-shoot combat fought from abo,e, 4eorge W. sent in massi,e numbers of ground troops
to hunt down out the e,il ones.
A wobbly alliance with the locals in Afghanistan was also formed, so that fewer body bags would be sent back to the
tates full of our brothers and sisters. )Who knows how many 'orthern Alliance fighters were buried in their nati,e soil.-
And while his father had the modest goal of expelling 6ra!i forces from :uwait, /ush the ?ounger went after the whole
falafel -- rounding up all the Al Faeda and "aliban e,il-doers he could find.
After the fighting in Afghanistan simmered down, the popular rhetoric of national affairs shifted away from geographic
specifics to the more general *war on terrorism.+ 'o longer in,ol,ing specific battles or well-defined goals, this war
!uickly began to look similar to other drawn-out wars with which my generation is familiar.
6n #$E#, first lady 'ancy =eagan boldly ad,ised us first-graders to *Bust ay 'o.+ )Abbie ;offman is widely reported to
ha,e said, *"o tell a drug addict to >just say no0 is like telling a manic depressi,e to >just cheer up.0+- oon after, 2resident
=eagan instigated the all-out war on druggies. /y #$EE, the Anti-3rug Abuse Act had set its national sites on both the
supply and demand of illegal substances in the <nited tates. "hough the 3GA had been on the scene since #$DH, =on
and 'ancy took seriously the e,il scourge that they saw infecting America0s children. "he war on drugs was born, has
thri,ed for more than #I years, and continues today with an o,erall federal budget of J#$.A billion.
/ut last time 6 checked, people still buy and use drugs with relati,e ease. "hough the statistics of drug use wax and wane
like a anta 1ru( tide, it is safe to say that the war on drugs has not been won. What0s more, the war is not a winnable
affair. "he war on drugs is a war on a perpetual opponent. <nlike a con,entional war, there will be no 'ormandy or
;iroshima, no crucial turning point or day of ,ictory when all the pot heads and speed freaks will finally surrender.
=eturning to our impromptu definition, there is no doubt that the war on drugs largely fits the characteri(ation of
con,entional war. "he national strategy has certainly been a strategic battle of wits between two e!ually matched
opponents )as the drug complex still manages to outfox the go,ernment with regularity and sophistication-. "his war has
also lasted for more than two decades, and nobody doubts that real casualties ha,e ensued, both domestically and abroad.
"he !uestion remains, howe,er, if this war will in fact e,er come to completion. 1an it be won8
6f we put our heads to it, we will !uickly recogni(e that a *war+ of this type is nothing but a grand metaphor, a riding crop
with which to whip patriotic Americans into action. 6n the case of the drug war, the <nited tates has mo,ed from
metaphor to militari(ed efforts in the attempt to alter its citi(ens0 habits. While these symbolic, rhetorical wars may seem
to ha,e few negati,e conse!uences, the conjuring of war0s images, passions and emotions has real effects. We are racing
toward a finish line that doesn0t exist.
"he language of war, in all its urgency and obligation, will always moti,ate the patriotic and righteous. "he metaphor
necessarily creates an enemy, which, when characteri(ed as such, becomes e!ually entrenched in the language of offense
and defense. At its dark heart, a war demands di,ision and opposition. =ight ,s. wrong. 4ood ,s. e,il. Like the war on
drugs, the war on terrorism is another o,erarching metaphor. "errorism, like drug use, is an act uni!ue to humanity, an
action which will always be with us. "o war against terrorism is to war against an enemy that does not exist in only one
place, that cannot be controlled by laws, that will perpetually be reborn in creati,e and wily ways. "errorism grows out of
the fecund social and cultural and economic and religious and psychological slough that is ci,ili(ation. Like the drug war,
the war on terrorism can ne,er be won.
5urther, the White ;ouse appears to be a little confused about what sort of war it is indeed fighting. "he administration
recogni(es that the war on terrorism is akin to the 1old War, explaining that no *sil,er bullet+ is going to make terrorism
go away, but that the pressure will be steadily applied until terrorism is *rooted out.+ "he difference, howe,er, between
the 1old War and the war on terrorism is that the former was between two nations with distinct policies and practices and
known !uantities and !ualities. "he war on terrorism could not be further from that tidy arrangement.
/y definition, terrorism is a concept or category that describes human actions. 6n most any dictionary, you will find no
examples of what terrorism must be in order to be considered as such. <nder the entry of *terrorism,+ you will not find
*hostage-taking,+ *suicide-bombing+ and *the throwing of Moloto, cocktails.+ =ather, you will find it described as
systematic and ,iolent acts to ad,ance political ends. "o war against terrorism, therefore, is to war against a classification,
a description, a word.
"ell me, how can bombs be dropped on a word8
At this point, you may be wondering9 3oesn0t this guy know that the war on terrorism is actually a war on terrorists8 "hat
it is a war on their weapons supply, their finances, their training camps and the axis of e,il that harbors them8 3oesn0t he
reali(e that this exercise in logic has nothing to do with the reality of reality8
Well, yes. And no. 6 am well aware that acts of terrorism do not commit themsel,es. 7f course, terrorism re!uires the
personnel, training and weapons that makes ,iolence possible@ limiting all of that should therefore logically decrease the
instances of terrorist acts. ;owe,er, the <nited tates must reali(e that this war -- while focused against terrorists, their
weapons, etc. -- is shaped and fought through the way we speak and write about it.
5ighting terrorism is different than fighting ca,ities. 6t is not a locali(ed menace that can be brushed away or filled with
lead. 7n ept. $, A&&# -- two days before the e,ents that sparked the /ush0s new war -- Alan /lock wrote in Pravda,
*When the metaphorical use of the term KwarL is common and seldom challenged, resistance to actual war becomes more
difficult and uncommon.+ G,entually, the ,erbal sparring becomes literal bombing.
When we generali(e about the e,ils of terrorism, we shroud the faces and politics and religion behind the acts. "hat which
moti,ates the militants has become opa!ued by the wordiness of bumper sticker aphorisms and campaign stump speeches.
While the war on terrorism has set its sites on the perpetrators and mechanisms therein, it has ignored that which initially
pro,okes the ,iolence. As a damning result, the e,il )if you will- will always be with us. As long as the seeds of terrorism
-- ignorance, injustice, exploitation -- are perpetually planted by the careless hand of the superpowers, the weeds of
,iolence will continue to steal nutrients from the fruits of ci,ili(ation.
2oliticians, prosecutors and preachers alike in,oke mo,ing imagery of cosmic battles of good and e,il. ?et, many public
figures use this language in knowingly figurati,e ways. 6 get the sense, though, that our current president takes seriously
his war on e,il, that with enough bombs, with plenty of firepower, and if right the people can be killed, then the axis of
e,il will fall. ;e does not seem to reali(e that e,il is perennial, that the death of one season0s crops will only fertili(e the
next season0s seedlings. /y creating martyrs of the e,il-doers, he is signing the marching orders of their followers and
inspiring a new impassioned generation of freedom fighters.
6 would like nothing more than to eradicate terrorism, along with po,erty, hunger, oppression and injustice. /ut in,oking
the language of war does more damage than it pre,ents. "o war against anything will e,entually allow the metaphors to
become realities. 6f the A&th century has taught us anything, it is that words ha,e conse!uences. Words persuade,
encourage and tyranni(e. "hey con,ey power, passion and persecution. When we in,oke the language of war, figurati,e
battles against finances become literal battles against financiers. ymbolic warfare against weapons supplies becomes
bloody warfare against weapons suppliers. While we arm oursel,es for war, the roots of the ,iolence go ignored, growing
deeper into the fertile soils of culture and power.
"en years ago, the 4ulf War was designed to somehow eradicate the threat that addam ;ussein posed in the Middle Gast.
"en years later, he has resurfaced as some sort of a potential threat. As 6 write this piece, the nation again finds itself on
the brink of an armed conflict with 6ra!, and in the fer,or of the war on terrorism, /ush awaits the political opportunity to
pounce on this nation and its leader who may or may not be supplying weapons to terrorists. 6nstead of using legitimate
means to approach the situation )e.g. <.'. inspections andMor diplomacy-, /ush is warming up the war crafts to take
matters into his own gun-slinging hands.
6n a famous article that appeared just before the first 4ulf War, linguist 4eorge Lakoff wrote, *6t is important to
distinguish what is metaphorical from what is not. 2ain, dismemberment, death, star,ation, and the death and injury of
lo,ed ones are not metaphorical.+ Acts based on a metaphor will mirror the metaphor. Warring words will become
warring deeds. 1learly, the metaphorical war on terrorism might just become a ,ery real attack on 6ra!, with real
casualties and conse!uences. When war is accepted in any form, it can be accepted in all forms. 7scar Wilde wrote in
#E$#, *As long as war is regarded as wicked, it will always ha,e its fascination. When it is looked upon as ,ulgar, it will
cease to be popular.+ 7nly when we choose to not in,oke the words of war to address social ills will we begin to sol,e the
problems that lead to ,iolence. More often than not, we are our own worse enemy.