Memorial Day: 1968 and 2008
The Los Angeles Times has reprinted an editorial from 1968 about the Memorial Day observance. Here is the link. From 1968:
In 1868, three years after the end of the bloodiest and most traumatic conflict in the nation's history, the commander of the Grand Army of the Republic ordered that the graves of the late Union dead be suitably decorated on May 30 as a mark of remembrance for the sacrifices they had made.
Thus began the custom of Memorial Day. In time it evolved as a commemoration for the dead of all the nation's wars, and is today observed in nearly all states throughout the land.
Few holidays, secular or religious, remain static in observance. The respectful simplicity of the early Memorial days has grown into a time of speechmaking and parades, of brief paid vacations for most Americans, of an opportunity for picnicking or beach-going or whatever, punctuated at public gatherings perhaps by a single minute of silent tribute to the nation's war dead.
We note these obvious facts, removed as they are from the purpose for which this day was first proclaimed, not in any spirit of sanctimonious condemnation.
The personal grief felt by many thousands whose relatives and friends fell in time of war does not require any special day for expression. For millions of other Americans the deaths of their countrymen on foreign fields is something of an abstraction, not inviting of sustained, mournful introspection. Tacitly, we all accept this.
But a Memorial Day commemorated in the midst of a war is particularly deserving of more than pro forma observance.
The last few weeks in Vietnam have witnessed the highest death tolls for Americans since our initial involvement in the conflict began seven years ago. The President speaks somberly, and no doubt accurately, of planned accelerated efforts by the enemy to inflict further civilian and military casualties and widening damage on the allied cause, in hopes of creating political and psychological pressures that will gain at the conference table what is unattainable for him on the battlefield.
At the Paris talks, the facile predictions of foreign and domestic critics of U.S. policy, who proclaimed for so long that if only the right American concessions were made the Communists would show themselves to be reasonable fellows willing to work for an honorable compromise, have thus far proven erroneous.
Instead we are once again face to face with an obdurate opponent who has proved himself ready to sacrifice the lives of combatants and innocents alike to realize his odious goals.
We do not know how much longer the struggle in Vietnam will go on, or how it might end. All that seems predictable, if we can use the past as a guide, is that future Memorial Days will, sadly, serve to commemorate many who have yet to give up their lives in their country's service.
We would suggest that the best remembrance, the greatest tribute, we can pay those who have died in their nation's wars, and those fated to do so, is not simply to institutionalize their sacrifice on one day out of the year. Rather it is to live our own lives as citizens of this Republic, and conduct our affairs as a power in the world, according to the higher goals in whose name these sacrifices are made.
That would be tribute indeed, and surely little enough to ask.
