In his now-forgotten statement proclaiming Memorial Day, the now-forgotten John A. Logan, the commander-in-chief of the Grand Army of the Republic, urged Americans not to forget those who had died in the Civil War. It was only three years since the guns were silenced. The country was stitched together but still torn asunder. Much grief and hurt remained.
So Logan, who in time would become a senator and an unsuccessful Republican candidate for vice president, saluted his fallen comrades as “the reveille of freedom to a race in chains” and described their deaths as “the tattoo of rebellious tyranny in arms.” He issued another call to arms, rallying veterans and civilians alike to visit the tombs of the fallen. His remarks began a great American tradition that became a great American holiday:
“Let us, then, at the time appointed, gather around their sacred remains, and garland the passionless mounds above them with choicest flowers of springtime; let us raise above them the dear old flag they saved; let us in this solemn presence renew our pledge to aid and assist those whom they have left among us a sacred charge upon the nation’s gratitude, the soldier’s and sailor’s widow and orphan.”
In this statement, itself an artifact from a time long past, there are echoes of perhaps the greatest speech ever delivered on these shores, the second inaugural address of Abraham Lincoln, who vowed that the nation would “care for him who shall have borne the battle and for his widow and his orphan.”
That phrase now is on a metal plaque at the entrance of the Department of Veterans Affairs and is enshrined in the American social compact, one of the few elements of our heritage beyond debate and insulated from partisan pressures.
For those of a certain age, which is to say younger than about 60, this day’s early popular name also is all but unknown. But for generations it was known as Decoration Day, and the meaning of that name is clear in Logan’s remarks. When he said, “The consecrated wealth and taste of the nation can add to their adornment and security,” he was speaking of decorating soldiers’ graves.
Today we garland the graves symbolically as well as literally, for there is a new burst of respect not only for the fallen but also for all those who have risen to the military needs of the country.
Last week’s Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll attracted much attention for its finding that support for Barack Obama and Mitt Romney were within the poll’s margin of error. But I was drawn not to the political horse race, but to another finding deep in the poll data — that 76 percent of Americans say they have “a great deal” or “quite a bit” of confidence in the American military.
That’s a very high rate of confidence, especially when you consider that in the same poll only 42 percent said the same thing about the presidency.
Americans aren’t in a new burst of patriotism, but they are in a new burst of appreciation for the military. You see it everywhere.
I’ve been to baseball games in Pittsburgh, Washington, D.C., and Boston in the past few weeks and at each park, returning veterans were introduced and honored. It was perhaps a public-relations decision on the part of the home teams to present them, but it was the individual choices of tens of thousands of people to stand in respect and appreciation for them, to cheer them in thanks, and perhaps to feel the telltale moisture of emotion in their eyes as they did so.
No one commanded those tens of thousands to feel that way. They just did. If you comb through the data from the WSJ/NBC News poll and others, you will see that this appreciation has been on a general upswing for more than a third of a century. The level of confidence in the military stood at 58 percent in June 1975. That was a few weeks after the North Vietnamese captured Saigon, ending a sorrowful chapter in American history in a sorrowful way. Today, confidence is 30 percent higher than it was then.
The data have other intriguing findings. In December 1988, just before the collapse of communism, the level of confidence in the military was at only 46 percent. Three years later, after the fall of the Berlin Wall but, almost certainly more relevant, after the first Gulf War, the confidence level was at 78 percent. It reached 85 percent in January 2002, just after the Sept. 11 terrorism attacks and the beginning of the Afghanistan offensive.
The military has had many failures in recent years, some because of poor strategic thinking in Washington, some because of poor behavior in Iraq and Afghanistan. Neither the war in Iraq nor in Afghanistan went even remotely according to plan, though students of the military know that while the first casualty of war is truth — Sen. Hiram W. Johnson’s great insight from 1918, and a sober reminder to all of us in the journalism trade — the second almost always is the carefully scripted plan for the conflict. In that regard, American military planners of the 21st century are part of a great tradition leading back to Andre Maginot and beyond. What is different now is public approbation for the combatants themselves. Some of it is shallow, or even phony, for the phrase “thank you for your service” sometimes bears the moral weight of “have a nice day.” Some of it is compensation for one of the worst sins of the Vietnam War, the distaste for the veteran who returned from an unpopular cause. Some of it is fashion.
Ordinarily I abhor or ignore fashion; I’m one of the few in my town or yours who needn’t change his wardrobe to attend a 1950s party. But let me say that this is a refreshing fashion. My family and likely yours has in its past the sadness of wartime loss. It’s our job, this weekend and all others of the year, to spend a moment in reflection and gratitude, and in hope that others will be spared the pain that takes no holiday, even this weekend.
• Shribman is executive editor of the Post-Gazette in Pittsburgh.





Comments (10)
Add commentHow would our forefathers' prose come across
today via texting on twitter? (Without the vowels)
And...just to add...
"in your moment in reflection and gratitude," don't bring out the 8 mm home videos of 'Woodstock' and Jane Fonda.
The silence is
deafening.
embedded in our history
Goes without saying that Americans have the deepest appreciation for our war dead. In an era where supporting the troops means putting a yellow magnet or a decal of the national ensign on your car -- good things of course; but whether you support these wars or question whether it's really about fighting for our freedom, consider:
Our way of life, where we as a nation are today, for good or ill, is DIRECTLY attributed to every single service member that died over there somewhere, no matter what cover story we're running with.
No Grendel, it does not go without saying.
I want to hear it said. There is an entire generation today getting a 'pass' for how they treated the Vietnam veterans returning home, not to mention how those serving our country, by conscript, were labeled 'baby killers'.
Allow me to speak for my generation. You can speak for yours.
kd II
the only appropriate response I have is they deserved better. It's your generation that's going to have to hold the ratbastard
activists accountable (they did a fair job derailing Kerry in '04). Mine has a Sesame Street-conditioned 30 sec attention span and fixation on 15 min celebrity.
Good response.
Believe me, there were plenty of activists in the jungles and rivers as well. A safe bet 99% did not want be there anymore than today's 99% would want them there.
All humility aside, Grendel, I find your contributions to this forum far above the 'bar'.
Excuse my abruptness on the subject. Of course our nation has turned a corner in appreciating, and welcoming, our troops home. As a nation we have matured.
The article above is a solemn remembrance to the fallen and a call to all citizens to know when to sheath the sword of retribution. Bring our troops home.
talk about getting a room
you're painting with a pretty broad brush you two, and it makes me wonder if either of you questioned your government about why we were involved in wars like Vietnam and the Persian Gulf as much as you question those who did.
Grendel, I'm afraid I don't appreciate your comments the way Ken Dunker does, if you're talking about the "ratbastard
activists" that have stood up to the line of BS coming out of the executive branch to goad our nation to war on so many occasions since world war 2---Nor do I get your drawing a line between them and the viet cong, KD.
But you're calling the executive branch to task now, aren't you, and good on you for it---Someone has to.
Yes, we remember the fallen---And we remember who put them there, who refused to ask questions, and who, ultimately, benefited from their sacrifice.
@jamison
your post touches on my exact sentiment. Consider, history will paint Libya as more or less moving the ball forward; Iran in '09, a missed field goal (shucks!); Pakistan, a messy fumble. Viet Nam - a loss; Iraq, another loss (in overtime), AF, should've stayed home; Beirut - another should've.
The difference is when American blood is shed it leaves a stain on our history. Memorial Day is a time out to recognize that those who bled - no matter the reason, the cause, the politics - they did it regardless because they were Americans and answered the call (some, albeit, unwillingly- they still went Over There). We are who we are today because they did what they did.
My Bottom Line (not directed at you, btw): check your politics at the door on Memorial Day. They did when they earned this honor.
correction
they weren't all Americans; many, many non-Amcits volunteer to serve in the US armed forces. They are still our war dead.