Veterans

Illinois NPR: DEMISE - Race, Culture Wars…

AS THE ALIGNMENT of the stars would have it, two of the podcasts I recorded last fall were delayed, then released this week within 36 hours of each other. This one, with Illinois NPR host Jay Hoffman, focuses on DEMISE, and on numerous current issues including race, polarizations, corporatism, suicide, schools, and the culture war. Enjoy!

- - - - - - -

Front Row Network (NPR): SPECIAL EPISODE: Interview with Author John M. Del Vecchio

Jay Hoffman has an interview with best-selling author and National Book Award Finalist John M. Del Vecchio as they dig into the many themes present in Del Vecchio's latest book "Demise: A Novel of Race, Culture Wars, and Falling Darkness".

SPECIAL EPISODE: Interview with Author John Del Vecchio | NPR Illinois

John Del Vecchio is a best-selling author and a National Book Award Finalist who offers his unique perspective on a variety of topics and their historical antecedents. He uses his time as a Vietnam veteran to tackle issues such as race, economic issues, mental health, and the changing family dynamics in society. In our interview with John, we will get into the many themes present in his latest book “Demise: A Novel of Race, Culture Wars, and Falling Darkness” and his personal experiences littered throughout. Please join us as we get the author’s perspective on his latest book.

DemiseCover3D.png

DEMISE: A novel of race, culture wars, and falling darkness

By: John M. Del Vecchio

To be released by Warriors Publishing Group — 8 September 2020

Illust 12-Mitch at casino

The following excerpts are from scenes in which Johnny Panuzio and Mitch Williams deal with the publication of Aaron William’s (Mitch’s son) thesis on race. Aaron’s full thesis will be available online in September at www.warriorspublishing.com or at www.peakingat70.com.

“Johnny, Mitch.”

“Hold one, Mitch.” Both men were in their offices in the ContGen­Chem tower. It was late afternoon. They had spoken earlier in the day, and Mitch had sent Johnny a portion of Aaron’s preliminary statement on affir­mative action. Johnny still had it on his desk, had read the first four pages, had blocked out several paragraphs and had underlined a few sentences. The concepts had sent his mind racing.

…behavior is consistent with self-image. Self-image is the prod­uct of individual and cultural story…

…I support affirmative action. However, I am opposed to race-based or gender-based — versus economic-based — affirmative ac­tion…

…I oppose race-based policies because they imply the genetic inferiority of the economically lagging race; as, too, do gender-based policies imply the genetic inferiority of the economically less advan­taged gender. The implications tend to instill a self-image of inferiority which, if it becomes internalized, produces specific self-defeating behaviors.

These implications of inferiority are hokum!

Race-based affirmative action is racist. It eventually hurts the very people it is intended to help.

Johnny glanced at his secretary then back at the pages. He’d felt as if Aaron had been talking directly to him. Within two pages, Johnny had decided to ask Mitch and Aaron if he could use Aaron’s paper as the basis for an article he intended to write. Johnny had seen how he could adopt the concepts of cultural story and self-image, but change the focus from race policy to advertising. He shuffled files on his desk, scanned another marked block.

Race-based solutions to economic problems are doomed to create worse economic problems for the protected race. It is time to scrap these programs, and to establish economic-status based programs. This will allow race to fall away as a conflict point. If the majority of those assisted are from one race, or one ethnicity, or if they are veterans, it is of no concern. The concern is only if they are poor…

Discriminatory actions, based on race, ethnicity, religion or gender, even if they are specifically tailored to make up for past discriminatory actions, per­petuate that discrimination…

“Hi, Mitch. I just heard from Julia. The game’s been canceled. Hold again, okay?” Johnny lowered the receiver, glanced at his secretary, said, “Lisa, can you give me a moment?”

“Certainly, Mr. Panuzio,” the young secretary answered. She slipped from the office and closed the door behind her.

“Son of a bitch,” Johnny said quietly into the phone to Mitch. “Tripps has been in and out of here all day. I’m only partway through Aaron’s — ”

“Mr. Impeccable or the old man?” There was no emotion in Mitch’s voice.

“Mr. Impeccable. You okay?”

“Yeah. Ah…I’ve got a big problem.”

“Vernon?”

“No. Aaron. We’re going to report Aaron missing.”

“What?!”

“He’s not at school. His girlfriend hasn’t seen him since they had a fight or something in school yesterday.”

“Jason said he was at the hospital last — ”

“No. He said a lot of kids were there. He was trying to cover for him.”

“That little…”

“The police are going to recheck the accident site, and there’s an inves­tigator going to talk to Ryan Willis. Damn it, Johnny. I’m worried. No­body’s seen a trace of him since yesterday!”

……………………………………………………………………………………….

Mitch did not let Johnny finish his sentence. “You know why?”

“A number of reas…”

“Bullshit!” Mitch bullied Johnny into silence. “There’s one fucken rea­son and only one fucken reason. Those cocksuckers at the top of the government…those gutless bastards who gutted…who emas­culated the War on Drugs. There’s a department known as the Office of National Drug Control Policy. Despite the fucking rhetoric, the fucking tears and wails about the tragedy, they chopped that budget by more than seventy-five percent. That’s just for starters. Shame on those bastards. What kind of example do they set?”

“They…”

“Bullshit!!” Mitch exploded. He was driving erratically. The car lurched left with each statement, swung right with each pause. “The example they set is tolerance. Tolerance for abuse! Reduced stigma for addiction! They glorify re­habilitation. It’s like it’s born-again Christianity! Bullshit! It’s not!”

“Whoa!” Johnny reared back as Mitch nearly rammed a car alongside them. The other driver swerved to a safe distance, flashed the finger.

Mitch was oblivious. “What the fuck do they think they’re goina get?!” His words were fast, hard, angry. “Reduced usage? Assholes. They’re all assholes. I fucken hate all them fucken enabling jerks. Try it. It’s okay. Experimenting is okay. Then if you get hooked, like it’s a mental disorder. ‘We’ll pay for your therapy.’ Fuck you!”

“Um.” Johnny swallowed. His head hurt. His mouth tasted like dirt and dirty socks. What could he say? He had not seen Mitch so angry since Thanksgiving 1965.

“Pricks,” Mitch raged. “They killed my son as much as if they pulled the trigger! Fuck ʼem! Fuck loyalty to those scumbags! If I thought I could get away with it, I’d blow away half the motherfuckers…”

“Mitch!” Johnny grabbed the wheel, pulled the car back into their lane. “Geez!” Mitch pushed his hand away. Johnny sat back. In a con­ciliatory tone he said, “If…if you decide to do it…I’ll go with you. But don’t go and do…”

“Fuck you!” Mitch balled his right fist, cocked his arm as if ready to strike. “You skipped out before. You’re not going to…”

“I didn’t skip out!” The words shot out defensively. “I never got called up.”

“Ssshhe-it!” Mitch hissed in disgust.

For some time they rode on in silence. Johnny wanted to defend himself, almost blurted out, “At least you’ve still got your job, your salary. At least your wife didn’t…” But he did not, could not. He knew there was no comparison; knew, too, that the spillover of Mitch’s anger, not cutbacks or downsizing, was threatening to subvert Mitch’s position with Tripps. He did not know how to help appease his friend’s anger. He had his own problems. His head throbbed.

Now Johnny imagined himself being arrested, being escorted from the Tower, maybe in shackles. Then he thought to say, “Ya know, Jason and the team can’t do it without Aaron any more than you could do it without me, or I could do it without you,” but he knew that that wasn’t any good, either. He wanted to empathize with Mitch; he wanted Mitch to get it out, felt he needed to get it out, felt Mitch had held it in too deep, had allowed it to fester too long; but this morning Johnny’s head hurt, he didn’t want to go in at all, and he wished that Mitch could empathize with him, too. It would have been so much nicer to have been able to talk about last night’s dinner, to share with him a tidbit about how sexy Julia had been.

They crossed the dam, swung north, came to a near standstill in rush-hour congestion. Mitch’s deep, slow burn streamed from him like an un­stoppable flow of lava. “You may not understand this,” he said harshly, “but what we’re going through — gone through — is a cultural revolution. Nobody calls it that, but America has changed as much in the past thirty or forty years as anything Mao or Pol Pot ever tried. We’ve changed more without programs of violence than Mao did with all his revolutionary pol­icies. This is not your father’s America.”

“Yeah,” Johnny shot at Mitch. “And it’s not my grandfather’s or your grandfather’s America, either. And I hope some of it’s been for the good.”

“You think I’m goina say yes because I’m black.”

“Yeah. Maybe.”

“Fuck it. That change came a hundred, two hundred years ago. There’s a big lag time from attitude change to full implementation. That’s still not here. But these other changes — this cultural revolution of the last fifty years — it’s undermining everything. The ramifications are going to explode on our kids. Those that survive. Aaron…”

Atlas Can No Longer Shrug,” Johnny said.

Mitch snorted, bit his lip, muttered, “That’s his paper…” Mitch paused. A deep breath came out of him. “Is it any good?”

“It’s terrific,” Johnny answered. “I wanta get it published.”

Energy seemed to ooze out of Mitch, seemed to flow from his every pore. Sitting behind the steering wheel in the car in the stalled traffic, he deflated. The skin below his eyes puffed, sagged. His jowls hung. Lifelessly he said, “You’ve really been going through those files, huh?”

“Yep,” Johnny said. It was better to talk about Aaron this way.

“He worked on it all summer,” Mitch said softly. “I didn’t pay much attention.” Mitch squeezed the wheel hard, held on. He was on the verge of tears but he held them in. “McMillian.” Mitch whispered. Again he swallowed. “Aaron had McMillian…had a lot of McMillian’s notes. You know McMillian?”

“Yeah.”

“They got pretty close — and with Aaron doing that legislative intern­ship, McMillian kind of guided him. Kind of was his mentor. Did you know he’d done some pretty extensive writing? Academic stuff. On Vietnam. Aaron used McMillian’s stuff as his paradigm.”

……………………………………………………………………………………….

The Lakeport Ledger

Section D-1 The Lakeport Ledger — A Callipano Corporation

Sunday, October 30, 199-

— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

Area Youth Lectures from Beyond the Grave

When Atlas Can No Longer Shrug — Freedom Is an Illusion

The first in a series of essays Aaron Williams with John Panuzio

RACE, CULTURE & PUBLIC POLICY: We stand at a critical time in the Lake Region, in this state, and in this nation, with regard to racial isolation and imbalances, and with regard to the equality of ed­ucation for all, and to the legitimate role of government in our lives. It is now time for us to analyze not simply where we are, how we arrived here, and where we are going, but also to understand what vehicle and what propulsion system has brought us to this point, and what vehicle and system is most suited for taking us into the future.

……………………………………………………………………………………

Callipano began by calling Aaron’s work “thoughtful yet controversial…an example of suburban thinking,” finished with, “No high school student writes this well. Much in these articles is certainly the work of John Panuzio,” at this Johnny grinned, his eyes twinkled, “director of marketing for Continental General Chemical. The articles smack of the conservative ideology which is certainly a trait of that corpo­ration. This commentator believes that Panuzio is attempting to pass off these ideas — in order to preempt criticism — as the work of an 18-year-old murder victim. The Ledger requests comments and rebuttals.”

Johnny’s mouth fell open. He reread the lines. Twice he’d met with Liz Callipano. She’d seemed so open, so sincere, so supportive of his position. How could she…? he thought. “…smacks of conservative ideology…“?! Johnny was baffled, stunned. Mitch is conservative, he thought. He’s the soldier. Not me. Request rebuttals?! He became angry, gritted his teeth, inhaled, huffed. As he began reading he grumbled, “Bitch!”

About the Author: John M. Del Vecchio is the author of five books, including two bestsellers with approximately 1.4 million copies sold, as well as hundreds of articles. He graduated from Lafayette College in 1969, was drafted and sent to Vietnam in 1970, where he served as a combat correspondent in the 101st Airborne Division (Airmobile). In 1971, he was awarded a Bronze Star Medal for heroism in ground combat.

  • - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

  • DEMISE is now available for pre-publication ordering at warriorspublishing.com and amazon.com

Memorial Day: Pawns or Patriots

[The following was delivered in Webster, MA on Memorial Day, 2015.]

I’d like to thank Jim Brinker, local veteran and author of West of Hue: Down the Yellow Brick Road, for inviting me to be here today; and thank all of you for allowing me to participate in honoring those who served, who sacrificed, who paid the ultimate price.

Emperor Minh Mang’s Palace, west of Hue, Vietnam: pillar detail

Emperor Minh Mang’s Palace, west of Hue, Vietnam: pillar detail

Memorial Day: It is a day to remember and to honor those Americans from long ago and from more recent times who paid the ultimate price—who paid with their lives, with their mortal existence—so that we may live as free citizens of this glorious nation,  and not as subjects of a regime.

To remember and to honor! How do we do that? How do we remember; what do we remember; and how should we behave so that our memories do indeed honor the fallen?

We seem to have short memories. Not just short, but shallow. Every day our memories are diluted with trivia as we are bombarded with gigabytes and terabytes of images and information about celebrity scandals, blips in the market, the newest and greatest gadget from Apple or Microsoft, or the most recent sale on cars, trucks, dishwashers or shoes.

We can barely recall last night’s news, but that makes little difference for it is soon be supplanted with tonight’s news. Seldom do we attempt to correlate items; seldom do we have the time or energy to check the validity or veracity of what is said.

So… Memorial Day… This day of remembrance…  this day to recall and to honor the fallen, this day to reflect upon the meaning of their sacrifice… Memorial Day… it becomes ever more important.

Yet amid the modern world’s massive assault upon our senses, even on Memorial Day, we tend to forget the perceptions and the reasons that were current at the time these men and women went to war.

That forgetfulness opens the door for politicians or political advocacy groups to tell us that we went to war without reason, or under false pretense. Some infer--if they do not overtly state--that the troops who fought were pawns in unwinnable conflicts; dupes in immoral conflicts; someone’s lackey used to enhance the personal power or wealth of others.

When we don’t recall history, we doubt ourselves, and that opens us up to accepting each new story… each new revelation… as fact. We then turn against those who sent our sons or daughters, our brothers or sisters, our mothers or fathers into harm’s way. And of the dead… though we may remember them as individuals, and though we may honor their courage… our forgetfulness allows us consider their lives as having been wasted, their sacrifices in vain.

What’s tripe!

As Jim mentioned, I served with the 101st Airborne Division (Airmobile) in Vietnam. The examples I’m about to use are related to that American engagement. Some of you might wish to extrapolate to more current conflicts, perhaps to the liberation of Kuwait, the fall of Ramadi, or to the slaughter of the Yazidi.

Over the past 35 years I have spoken in perhaps a hundred classrooms. A common question, particularly from younger students, has been, “Did you kill anyone?” My answer has always been: “You’re asking the wrong question. You should be asking, ‘Did I save anyone’s life?’ or ‘Did the soldiers with whom I served save lives?’”

We’ve all been told that the war was unwinnable; that we backed the wrong side; that our troops committed unending atrocities and “killed anything that moved.” Worse, we’re told that we went to war to protect French Imperialism, or so Lady Bird Johnson’s transportation company could make lucrative profits. If these accusations are true, what does that say about the deaths of 58,000 of our brothers and sisters? What does it say about the sacrifice made by so many?

Let’s back up and recall some of the basic events as they were unfolding.  With the defeat of Japan at the end of World War II, France reasserted control over its former colonies in Southeast Asia. From 1945 to 1954 they battled the Viet Minh… mostly in the northern areas of Vietnam known as Tonkin. Some recent textbooks tell us that the United States paid 80% of the cost of that war—and that we thusly supported French Imperialism.

In reality, the United States paid 0% of those war costs from 1945 to mid-1950; and did not begin to pay until after China fell to Mao’s communist forces in 1949, and after Red China invaded the Vietnamese island of Hainan in early 1950. These events happened on the heels of much of Eastern Europe falling under the dominance of Soviet communism; yet even then our role was limited. By the time Dien Bien Phu fell in 1954, America had become involved… but our actual piece of the war budget against the Viet Minh amounted to approximately 8% -- not 80%!

One might ask, “Doesn’t that still prove that the U.S. backed the return of colonialism?” The answer is, “No.” That’s not what we were backing; nor is that what the French were seeking. Indeed, in Cambodia where there was no significant communist insurgency, France granted that nation de jure independence in 1949, and complete independence in 1953. Only the battle against communist tyranny kept that from happening in Vietnam.

Do you recall—a decade later—repeatedly being told that America escalated the war? Why would we do that? Perhaps you know… perhaps not…  that in 1959, five years before the Marines hit the beaches at Da Nang, Hanoi’s politburo essentially declared war against the South by ordering the establishment of three infiltration routes to carry men and materiel from the north into the south. The routes were labeled 559, 759 and 959 for the month and year of their inception. Route 559, or May 1959, became the infamous Ho Chi Minh Trail.

Hanoi infiltrating agents began a terror campaign designed to disrupt the budding and burgeoning social and economic order in the Republic of Vietnam—that is, South Vietnam. In 1960, northern terrorists murdered approximate 100 South Vietnamese official—school teachers, hamlet elders, young village entrepreneurs—each month. These assassinations grew to 1,000 per month by 1962—12,000 murders and “disappearances” in a nation of approximately 11 million people in one year! That would be the equivalent of terrorist murdering 350,000 Americans in 2015. That was the terror campaign America opposed; that was the basic situation which convinced Presidents Eisenhower and Kennedy to send the first advisors and first troops.

Communist atrocities accelerated in ’63 and ’64, yet the story we usually hear of those years questions the veracity of a single incident in August 1964—the attack on the American ship, the C. Turner Joy in the Gulf of Tonkin… as if, somehow, that was the only justification for further engagement!

Infiltration route 559, the Ho Chi Minh trail, was strategic to the communist war effort. Early allied efforts were not enough to stop the flow of insurgent troops and supplies. This route—a complex of interlacing mountain roads and trails—ran down from the North, crossed the DMZ at scores of points, then entered the jungled mountains of our A. O., our area of operation, known as I Corps. The trail continued down through the broad and treacherous A Shau Valley, and south into the Central Highlands.  Jim and I, and thousands of Americans, fought here. Our mission in these sparsely-inhabited mountains was to find, engage and disrupt this heavily-armed, infiltrating force; and thereby to stop the terrorism and provide security for the civilian population in the densely populated lowlands.

That mission—from the time of the first Special Forces camp at Ta Bat, through the battles of Lang Vei, Khe Sanh, Dong Ap Bai (Hamburger Hill), Ripcord, and Lom Son 719… that mission—taken on by both American and South Vietnamese forces—despite tremendous hardship and significant loss of life—was highly successful. Every year communist forces had to escalate their efforts in order to keep up their terrorist attacks. Each year the Republic of Viet Nam grew stronger.

Some little known facts and figures: Following the 1968 Communist Tet Offensive, the South Vietnamese citizenry, previously untrusted by their government, was armed by their government. Over the next three years, while US forces were reduced by 58%, communist terror attacks (assassinations, abductions and bombings) on villages and hamlets dropped 30%, small-unit attacks dropped 41%, and battalion-size attacks dropped 98%! Armed citizens were the crucial factor.

At the same time, rice production increased by nearly 10%, war related civilian injuries dropped 55%, and enemy-soldier defections increased to the highest levels of the war. Armed, the South Viet Namese citizenry became an effective force in protecting themselves and their property from an organized terror campaign. Do you recall ever being told any of this? Do you know that more than 200,000 North Vietnamese soldiers defected to the South?

How do we remember and honor our dead if we don’t know what these men did; why they fought; what was the cause; who was the enemy, and why did we oppose that enemy? Let me also mention that knowledge—truthful knowledge, not politically correct propaganda—is a miracle elixir… It lifts the spirits, and ameliorates the suffering of PTSD.

But as it happened, by late 1968 our national focus shifted? In the defense of the civilian population from communist terrorism, and in the pursuit of freedom, errors and abuses had been made. Our national attention turned to these errors and abuses, and freedom and the defense of the defenseless were no longer in our sight.

Critics of the War in Vietnam called all American tactics into question. You may recall Ted Kennedy condemning U.S. military operations below the DMZ, in I Corps, in the A Shau valley, at Dong Ap Bia, and at Ripcord. Seemingly he had forgotten that terrorists were infiltrating via these very routes.

His focus, along with that of much of the media, had shifted. Recall the My Lai massacre where American troops killed some 300 South Vietnamese civilians. From exposure of that incident in 1969, to 1972, 473 nightly TV news stories—nearly 10% of all news coverage of the war from 1962 to 1975—focused on that one atrocity—yet not a single story was aired about the 6000 communist assassinations of South Vietnamese non-military, government personnel in 1970 alone! What did that skewed reportage do to the American psyche?! What did it to the image of American troops who served and who were still serving in Vietnam? How did it paint veterans of that conflict, how did it paint those who paid the ultimate price, for decades thereafter?

 If we perceive American troops as barbarians—as undisciplined baby killers or drug addicts; or if we are ignorant of the foes atrocious acts and ultimate aims—can we say we have kept faith with those who fell?

Errors and abuses were addressed. American ground forces were withdrawn by early 1972. The armed southern population carried the bulk of their own local defense, yet America’s focus remained on “American atrocities.”

This shift in the political momentum led to the abandonment of our allies, and the people of Southeast Asia. The abandonment can be inferred by economic support. The US budget for the war, adjusted for inflation, fell by over 95% from 1969 to 1974. Weapons and ammo in the South became relatively scarce. By comparison, Communist economic support for the North Vietnamese Army increased by 400%.

With highly limited funds the Army of The Republic of Vietnam was not able to keep up the fight in western I Corps, below the DMZ, down through the A Shau Valley and south into the Central Highlands. By 1974 Communist forces had rebuilt the roads and trails of Route 559, and had established oil and gas pipelines from the north all the way to Song Be city in the south.

The final communist offensive which toppled the Saigon government employed 500 Soviet tanks, 400 long-range artillery pieces and over 18,000 military trucks moving an army of 400,000 troops down through this corridor, through western I Corps, past Ripcord and Dong Ap Bia, through the A Shau Valley, and south. 400,000 troops!

U.S. abandonment of the South Vietnam lead directly to 70,000 executions in the first 90 days of communist control; to the death of millions in Cambodia, to a half million Boat People fleeing the new oppression—many of those dying at sea; to more than a million people being incarcerated in gulag re-education camps; and to the communist ethnic cleansing of Laos.

Do you recall my asking students to change their question. Did we save lives? The answer is yes. Our presence, our efforts, our sacrifices, saved millions of lives. And that’s the point. That’s what made the effort and the sacrifice not in vain.

To Remember and to honor means knowing these things. It means remaining vigilant when pundits and propagandists are stressing the errors or abuses that we, as a nation, have committed; yet simultaneously omitting the good, the honorable and the valorous that we accomplished. Even worse, is when they ignore the evil which we opposed.

So… on this Memorial Day, what we remember, how we remember, and how we act and react is important. There is no honor in remembering falsehoods; no honor in manipulating history for political or economic gain. And we cannot and do not honor our fallen by believing they were pawns.

Lastly, may I suggest, if you truly want to honor our dead, be the kind of person, the kind of citizen, the kind of American, worthy of their sacrifices.