Revisionist history

October 21, 2007 on 9:48 pm | In Uncategorized |

Howard was at it again in the Big Debate tonight, rabbiting on about how we should be teaching kids a ‘narrative’ of what a wonderful country we are.

It reminded me of something he said 10 days ago:

The Battle of Long Tan was the first significant engagement of the Vietnam War. It has come to be considered a defining event in Australia’s history.

I’m prepared to overlook the sloppy drafting in the first sentence and assume he meant ‘first significant engagement involving Australians‘, but I doubt any Americans who read it would be so forgiving, let alone any Vietnamese.

More importantly however, and no disrespect to the comparative handful of Australian troops involved, but the second sentence about it being ‘a defining event’ is complete rubbish. I don’t even know what it’s supposed to mean. What did the Battle of Long Tan define? Its impact on the course of either the Vietnam War or Australian history was three fifths of five eighths of SFA.

It illustrates perfectly why so many people are deeply suspicious of Howard when he drapes himself in the flag, wanders into a photo op with a bunch of men in uniform, and starts talking about the importance of teaching the right kind of history. He doesn’t want to teach history at all. He does indeed want to get kids to accept a ‘narrative’, which in this case is a piece of creative writing that takes real events and interprets them to suit John Howard’s simplistic jingoism … and which he can then, of course, use as a club to beat a range of political opponents including just about anyone in the public school sector, or on ‘the left’, or from a state Labor government, or in a university, or any of the other pet Howard hates.

Like so many unsettling things about Howard, he resorts constantly to the rhetoric, the mentality and the manipulative tools that authoritarian governments have used down the ages. Of course the wingnuts would twist my argument so they could trot out the usual nonsense about the left claiming Howard=Hitler or some such. The truth is that Howard’s mob have so far taken limited, albeit significant, steps towards authoritarian government in this country. But it’s not much use sitting watching with bright-eyed curiousity to see how far they’ll go. It’s the attitudes that are important, and these blokes’ attitudes are a definite worry. They need to be questioned and pulled into line at every opportunity.

Long Tan a ‘defining event’ indeed. What bullshit. The whole Vietnam disaster was the defining moment - and one that brought great discredit to Australia. That’s what we should be teaching kids in school, so they are less likely to support new Liberal adventures in support of our Great and Powerful Friend.

4 Comments »

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

  1. I would have thought the Gulf of Tonkin incident was both more significant and more to Ratty’s taste considering it was by and large imaginary.

    Comment by zoot — October 21, 2007 #

  2. […] read more here This entry was posted on Sunday, October 21st, 2007 at 6:48 am and is filed under australia history. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site. […]

    Pingback by speedda » Blog Archive » Revisionist history — October 23, 2007 #

  3. ken, your post reminds me of how amusing it is whenever the Right rails against postmodernism and brands it Leftist, because they just don’t get that postmodernism is actually non-ideological and that they’re just as postmodern as everyone else. their postmodernism is conspicuous in their endless insistence on the primacy of an approved white man narrative and an approved white man canon.
    and then there’s that slippery political correctness where it’s only bad if it’s coming from the Left but it’s nigh on compulsory when it’s coming from the Right (viz the Chaser Eulogy).

    Comment by Gianna — October 23, 2007 #

  4. Hi Ken,

    Unfortunately it seems your political bias and historical ignorance is getting in the way of facts.

    The Battle of Long Tan was a defining moment in the Vietnam War and Australia’s history:

    As at August 1966 the South Vietnamese and US forces had suffered significant casualties and defeats right across Vietnam. The outcome of the battle at Long Tan was so significant as an allied success that General Westmoreland and his command did not beleive that 108 Australians and New Zealanders had fought and won a battle against such an overwhelming force. As such, Westmoreland flew down to the battlefield to see what happened for himself. 105 Australians and 5 Kiwi’s fought and defeated 2,500 VC and NVA resulting in 18 Australian dead, 21 wounded and some 500-800 enemy killed and more than 1,000 wounded.

    Major Harry Smith who commanded D Coy during the battle was rolled out to the world’s media the battle was so significant.

    The decimation of the Viet Cong D445 Battalion and the Viet Cong Main Force 275 Regiment by the Australians at the battle meant that the Australian’s were never again seriously challenged in their area of operations in Phuoc Tuy province. The Australian’s went on to eventually secure the entire province and neutralise the enemy for the duration of the war something which was never achieved anywhere else in Vietnam by the Sth Vietnamese, the US or French.

    The battle was a watershed for the Australian Army, RAAF and Australian Armour. Prior to the battle the Australian’s were still operating to WWII, Korean and Malayan doctrines. The Australian Army changed many standard operating procedures as a consequence of the battle as did the RAAF and the Armour regiments. Most of these procedures and tactics remain to this day including the Australian, NZ and UK armies using Long Tan as a case study for close artillery support for infantry - 41 years after the battle!

    The battle was the single largest loss of life since Korea and WWII so I many would classify that as a defining moment in our history.

    Vietnam was the longest war that Australia has ever fought in, 10 years and as such it is a critical chapter in our history. The battle of Long Tan was the first significant engagement by Australian forces against the VC and NVA in this long war and it was such an overwhelming defeat against the enemy that it has to be a defining historical event in all military history, not just Australia’s. The enemy opposing the ANZAC forces were 25 to 1 against and the enemy had the advantage of the element of surprise!

    It is ironic that some 60,000 Australians served in Vietnam and their contribution resulted in a successful pacification and securing of an entire province during the war. As some of the Long Tan veterans say, the Australian soldiers won almost every battle they fought in Vietnam and succeeded in their objectives but somehow the politicians lost the war and most of the public has been taught that Vietnam was an overwhelming defeat for Australia.

    What really sickens me is peopl who want to rewrite history to suit their political or ideological beliefs and use their own disdain or dislike for individuals or politicans which have absolutely nothing to do with the history itself. You are hypocritical because you are doing exactly what you are accusing Howard of doing - using historical events to justify a ideological point of view.

    By the way if you really want to understand the reasons for Australia’s involvement if South East Asian conflicts from WWII onwards you should read Ian McNeill’s Official Army History. If you go in with an open mind like I did you will be very surprised as the reasons and they had little to do with simply following the US into that conflict.

    Cheers mate,
    Martin

    Comment by Martin — November 3, 2007 #

Leave a comment

XHTML: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>

Powered by WordPress with Pool theme design by Borja Fernandez.
Entries and comments feeds. Valid XHTML and CSS. ^Top^