Approximately 3400 Americans have earned the Congressional Medal of Honor since 1861. With few exceptions it is awarded for bravery and valor above and beyond the call of duty; it is reserved for the bravest of the brave.
Since the Civil War, only 19 individuals were awarded the Medal twice; Smedley Butler was one of them.
Butler’s decades of active service took him to China, Europe and Central America. His actions in two now obscure battles, Vera Cruz, Mexico (1914), and Fort Riviere, Haiti (1915) both resulted in Medals of Honor.
Believing he hadn’t done enough to earn it Butler returned his first Medal of Honor. (The Medal was returned to him with orders that he keep it and wear it.) Though Butler was humble about his service, Theodore Roosevelt described him as “the finest fighting man in the armed forces.” Retiring as a Marine Corps Major General in 1931, Butler lectured and wrote extensively on anti-war themes. His undeniable patriotic credentials and strong anti-interventionist views made him a lightning rod of controversy until his death in 1940.
As one of the leading soldiers of his generation and an outspoken critic of military adventurism, Butler was approached in the early 1930s by a cabal of powerful businessmen who invited him to join a fascist plot to overthrow Franklin D. Roosevelt. The General pretended to be interested but instead exposed the plot via Senator John W. McCormack of the “Special Committee on Un-American Activities Authorized to Investigate Nazi Propaganda and Certain Other Propaganda Activities” (McCormack-Dickstein Committee/1934-1935). Although the Committee believed Butler (with some later analysts crediting Butler with saving the country), they declined to take action against the plotters.
Butler’s disillusionment with power brokers, military and political leaders, big capitalists, and hypocrites increased during this time. In 1935 Butler published “War is a Racket,” a slim book with a big anti-interventionist and isolationist message.
For a great many years, as a soldier, I had a suspicion that war was a racket; not until I retired to civil life did I fully realize it. Now that I see the international war clouds gathering, as they are today, I must face it and speak out.
Not commonly known outside historian and pacifist circles, “War is a Racket” strongly reiterates George Washington’s 1796 “Farewell Address” which ominously warned against “foreign entanglements.”
Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence (I conjure you to believe me, fellow-citizens) the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake, since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government.
…
Why quit our own to stand upon foreign ground? Why, by interweaving our destiny with that of any part of Europe, entangle our peace and prosperity in the toils of European ambition, rivalship, interest, humor or caprice?
“War is a Racket” clearly reflects Washington’s warning.
Besides, what business is it of ours whether Russia or Germany or England or France or Italy or Austria live under democracies or monarchies? Whether they are Fascists or Communists? Our problem is to preserve our own democracy.
Butler dramatically makes the case in “War is a Racket” that all the wars in which he participated were wars of profiteers and American expansionism. In a 1933 speech Butler said,
I helped make Mexico, especially Tampico, safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefits of Wall Street. The record of racketeering is long. I helped purify Nicaragua for the international banking house of Brown Brothers in 1909-1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for American sugar interests in 1916. In China I helped to see to it that Standard Oil went its way unmolested.
There is no question that war itself, the process of killing, destruction and mass suffering that is attendant to it, should always be avoided if at all possible. In addition, while wars for profit or adventurism are immoral, it must be acknowledged that there are always those who bring war to those who prefer peace. This truth fundamentally challenges Butler’s isolationist ideal. In the same 1933 speech quoted above, he said,
I believe in adequate defense at the coastline and nothing else. If a nation comes over here to fight, then we’ll fight.
How does Butler’s isolationism and rejection of foreign entanglements mesh with his appreciation of the rise of totalitarianism across Europe prior to World War Two? Regarding the rise of Hitler and Mussolini, Butler wrote,
There are others in Europe too whose sabre rattling presages war, sooner or later. Herr Hitler, with his rearming Germany and his constant demands for more and more arms, is an equal if not greater menace to peace.
Certainly, Butler’s coastal defense posture would have been ineffective against Nazism.
If the United States were to reject war would our resulting moral superiority somehow assist us in defending ourselves against those who actively embrace it? Some make the case that all war is wrong. Does the fact that some few make obscene profits in war mean that every war effort is illegitimate?
There are motivators other than profit and greed that drive conflicts, ideology and religion being the most prevalent current paradigm. In these dark times of wars and rumors of war where does Smedley Butler’s isolationism and “To Hell With War!” ethos fit, if anywhere?
A warrior and pragmatist as well as an idealist, Butler understood that only through the unlikely universal acceptance of disarmament and an abandonment of the concept of war itself could war be eradicated.
There is only one way to disarm with any semblance of practicability. That is for all nations to get together and scrap every ship, every gun, every rifle, every tank, every war plane. Even this, if it were possible, would not be enough.
We live in an interconnected world with rivals, enemies, and allies. We have agreements with numerous nations (e.g., NATO) stipulating that an attack on one is an attack on all. The concept of an uninvolved “Fortress America” so popular with isolationists is no longer feasible.
In a world of intercontinental missiles and long-range bomber fleets, the “Atlantic Wall” that long ago kept our mainland so difficult for enemies to attack during the early years of the country has fallen. Our national survival requires us to hope for peace but be prepared for war. Thomas Gates, Secretary of Defense under Eisenhower, said,
Should we ever abandon our forward strategy in favor of the so-called ‘Fortress America’ concept, we would retreat forever.
Butler’s “coastal defense” concept is now entirely overturned and obsolete. An enemy driven not by greed or profit but by a cruel ideology has already breached our defenses. Terrorism is asymmetrical war, but it is still war.
It would be a detriment to ourselves, our friends and to those who look to us for guidance and support to withdraw behind our already breached fortress walls. The idealism of Smedley Butler is similar to the idealism (and ignorance) of the interfaith “bridge builders” of today. They erroneously believe that if we are über-tolerant to Islam, then Islam will “leave us alone.” This is not unfortunately how Islam works. Our enemies will never “leave us alone“.
Faced as we are with determined and brutal enemies, the isolationist approach – while continuing to be attractive to some – is no longer possible nor desirable.
Generals Washington and Butler left us warnings that we should avoid foreign entanglements, and wars of aggression, expansion, and profit. A cruel enemy whose goal is our destruction cannot be opposed through isolationism and non-involvement; our coastal defenses are already breached.
“War is a Racket” is a crie-de-coeur of non-involvement now thoroughly overturned by the harsh exigencies of the crises that we face and the challenging, often hostile nature of our world.
Generals Butler and Washington are gone now but, as General Douglas MacArthur once said, old soldiers never die. Their insights, and high standards of integrity, bravery, and patriotism remain though their dreams of an America isolated, safe and unmolested have faded away.
COMMENTS
Please let us know if you're having issues with commenting.