In Hanns Johst’s Schlageter, first performed at the State Playhouse in Berlin in April 1933 to celebrate Hitler’s birthday, Friedrich Thiemann proclaims that whenever he hears the word ‘Culture’, he reaches for his Browning.  The line is symptomatic of the play.  A review in the New York Times warned theatre-goers that ‘If you don’t believe that everything worthwhile in history has been won by slaughter…, you won’t go home happy.’   In recent years the US military has been contemplating the reverse of these positions: inverting the modern American way of war, substituting cultural awareness, cultural intelligence and culture-centric warfare for the post-Vietnam Weinberger-Powell doctrine of overwhelming force, and promoting ‘non-kinetic’ over ‘kinetic’ modes of engagement across the occupation zone.  This implies an emphasis on the protection of the population rather than ‘force protection’

In this essay Rush to the intimate:FINAL.doc I describe the genealogy of the cultural turn through four of its principal architects; I show how it has found its way into the US Army’s new Counterinsurgency doctrine and how it has been incorporated into pre-deployment training (war games and simulations); I outline the continuities between these new developments and the logic of the ‘war on terror’; and I sho win detail how the publicity that has surrounded the cultural turn has distracted attention from the continuation of military violence in Iraq, while repositioning the military as a supposedly innocent bystander in a purely ethno-sectarian conflict.  A shortened version of the essay will appear in Radical Philosophy, an illustrated version in my forthcoming book War cultures.The cultural turn and late modern war_files/Rush%20to%20the%20intimate%3AFINAL.docshapeimage_1_link_0
The cultural turn and
late modern war
 
 
 
 
The supposed success of cultural awareness, cultural intelligence and
culture-centric warfare in Iraq have been personalized through the iconic figure of General David Petraeus.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
But what lies behind the cultural turn are a series of other figures - including T.E. Lawrence - and a highly partial appropriation of the humanities and social sciences (especially anthropology) that continues the Orientalism that underwrites the ‘war on terror’ and perpetuates the colonial present.   The cultural turn also provides new opportunities for private contractors, and so extends the neo-liberal armature of late modern war.   And it reassures the American public that the US military (if not the US government) has learned from the horrors of Abu Ghraib.  The new  counterinsurgency doctrine uses biomedical metaphors to promote US intervention as essentially therapeutic - a gesture which is also therapeutic for the American public, if not for the people of Iraq.