Courage is like a Rolex watch. Cheap imitations abound. The real thing is real and rare.
Bravery, for example, is something very different than
bravado, as exemplified in the life and career or George McGovern. People who possess genuine fortitude aren’t
usually the kinds who boast about their military record. They don’t have to prove anything to anybody.
So although I voted for George McGovern forty years ago, it
wasn’t until recently that I realized he even had a war record or that he’d won
the Distinguished Flying Cross. He
piloted 35 bombing missions over some of the most heavily defended cities in
Europe. Twice he brought down planes
that had either lost their engines or had their noses blown off by enemy
flak. But these weren’t feats he boasted
about in the presidential sweepstakes.
Like any men who’d seen fighting, he seemed rather reticent about
revisiting this violent chapter of his past.
And of course it might have made a difference in the election if he had
been more forthcoming.
For as the “dove” in the race, McGovern was depicted in the
press as a dreamer, maybe even a sissy, less practical and tough than
hard-headed hawks like Henry Kissinger and Nixon’s other advisers in the White
House. Many voters may have shared
Gloria Steinem’s first impression of the man: “I thought he was too nice to be a Senator,” she said. Yet McGovern was precisely the man who had
the most realistic picture of the war, who understood from terrifying firsthand
experience what such hostilities involves.
Unfortunately, the voters sensed that McGovern was neither a bully nor a
braggart, and concluded mistakenly that he lacked guts. They confused bravery with braggadocio.
There’s another common misconception about courage, as
well. Many seem to think that being
courageous is the same as being fearless.
But even the boldest figures are prey to fears. George McGovern, for example, had a lifelong
fear of flying. He’d signed up for a
piloting course with the Civil Air Patrol early in college, partly at the instigation
of a friend, partly because a high school gym coach had called him a “physical
coward.” But he hated every minute in
the air, didn’t like soloing (which he told his wife “scares me silly”) and
thought that getting his license would mean he’d never have to fly again.
Then came Pearl Harbor.
McGovern had good reason to be afraid at that point, because he found
himself in command of a B-24 bomber, sometimes called the “Liberator” but known
among airmen as “the liquidator” or flying coffin. It was not a forgiving or particularly sturdy
aircraft, and hits that the older B-17’s might have taken in stride were likely
to mean real trouble on McGovern’s plane, the Dakota Queen. To survive
when, as McGovern put it, “men flying on my wings were getting blown out of the
sky” meant being able to keep your wits even in the midst of terror. Courage in that context meant asking
questions, “Are the landing gear working, will the oil pressure hold?” It meant not giving in to panic.
Courage demands holding onto our rational and critical
capabilities, even when the adrenaline is pumping. Later in McGovern’s career, courage entailed
asking questions about U.S. foreign policy.
When others were following the herd, seeking shelter in numbers, McGovern
stood alone, the first man in the U.S. Senate to openly criticize our
government’s war aims in Vietnam. Many
folks were afraid to ask such questions: afraid of appearing disloyal, afraid
of appearing weak or foolish. But
courage, now as then, means overcoming those fears. It suggests a certain cool-headed appraisal
of the situation when hot-heads are beating the drums and sounding the alarm.
And if bravery implies keeping our minds fully engaged, it
also suggests keeping our humanity intact, even under the worst assaults. Being courageous is different from being
callous or cold-blooded. “Once McGovern
was at a bar in the officer’s club when a couple of fighter jocks came in
bragging about two Italian civilians they had shot off a bridge,” says one
biographer. They had a few rounds left
from their strafing mission, so they’d given the strangers a burst of fifty calibers. “Did you see the way that son of a bitch hit
the water?” laughed one to the other. “It
might have been whisky talk,” says McGovern, but still he was repulsed by the
exchange. “I was stunned that anyone
could be so barbaric about the taking of human life.”
McGovern never lost his sense of common decency, even with
all the atrocities he’d witnessed. And
that was why one particular incident continued to trouble him for decades after
the war ended. The Dakota Queen was on a bombing run when bad weather forced it back
to the base. Lancing with the bombs
still on board could be fatal, and so the normal protocol was to jettison the
explosives over the ocean or in some remote, uninhabited area. In this case, however, a new bombardier was
on board. They would have been plenty of
time to release the bombs over an unpopulated section of Yugoslavia as the Queen was heading home to Italy, and
most of the crew assumed that’s where they’d been dropped. But sometime later, Tex Ashlock, the waist
gunner, was watching the scenery go by in Austria when he suddenly saw the
whole payload, six five-hundred pounders, dropping straight toward a farmhouse
dead ahead. The house disappeared in a
roar of brown smoke. And although
McGovern would later say that there was little he regretted about the war, that
Hitler had to be stopped, he always felt sick about what happened to that tiny
homestead. He knew he had blood on his
hands.
Then something remarkable happened. In 1985, forty years after the war ended,
McGovern was interviewed on Austrian television about his wartime
exploits. He told the story of
destroying the farmhouse. And that
night, the TV station got a call from an elderly gentleman. He’d been living in that farmhouse in 1945
and came forward to proclaim that he was still alive, had been working in the
fields at some distance when he saw the Queen
pass overhead and bomb his home. He said
he bore no ill feeling toward the crew, thankful that so many Americans had
risked their lives to rid the world of fascism.
The loss of his property, he said, was simply his share of the
sacrifice.
Situations that seem doomed turn out to have hopeful, happy
endings. And this is why we must never
lose courage, even when the odds against us seem overwhelming. For as theologian C.S. Lewis writes, “Courage
is not simply one of the virtues, but
the form of every virtue at the testing point, which means the point of highest
reality.” When the chips are down, when
the going gets tough, when there’s every reason to be scared, can we keep our
minds and hearts engaged, continuing to risk dissent, continuing to care not
only for our comrades-in-arms but also for strangers and those caught in the
cross-fire? Can we maintain our
compassion regardless of the provocation?
I sincerely hope so.
For even in a world where old-fashioned heroes like George McGovern are
hard to find, this kind of courage is needed more than ever.
1 comment:
Hi Gary,
I had the pleasure of hearing Colman McCarthy speak recently, a long time hero of mine since my DC days. It prompted me to revisit his articles on Peace, and there are some of the most powerful essays on vegetarianism I have ever read. I feel increasingly judgemental and upset about our society's callousness towards animals/meat consumption. Any thoughts on effective change-making in this area to make me feel like I'm doing something besides "modeling"?! Thanks and best,
Valerie Wood-Lewis
Post a Comment