Lessons from Second World War Anthropology Peripheral, Persuasive and Ignored Contributions
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Lessons from Second World War anthropology Peripheral, persuasive and ignored contributions DAVID PRICE Anthropologists were largely called upon to contribute their World War II and other past wars must be viewed in the David Price is Associate specialized knowledge to the war effort. The nature of the con- historical context of their times. The international anthro- Professor of Anthropology, St. tacts they had established with native peoples the world over pological community needs to be aware of past anthropo- Martin's College, Lacey, and the methods they had developed for understanding varied Washington, USA. A modes of life permitted them to give realistic aid to intelligence logical contributions to war, and we need to critically forthcoming essay examines units, or to those carrying on economic and psychological war- evaluate these past activities not in order to criticize past some of the ways in which fare and to advise concerning many types of postwar programs anthropologists, but to help provide a framework for anthropological interactions with military and intelligence of rehabilitation. coping with present and future pressures for anthropolo- agencies in the Cold War ‘Anthropology 1944’ gists to contribute to military and intelligence operations. became increasingly Britannica Book of the Year 1944 While past wartime anthropological decisions may be seen complicated and ignored. His as appropriate for their times, the context of contemporary email is [email protected]. The well established links between anthropologists and wars raises many more complex and problematic issues. colonialism documented in the work of scholars like Talal Asad, Kathleen Gough, Dell Hymes, Adam Kuper and WWII: Anthropological warfare comes of age George Stocking stand in marked contrast with the sparse The First World War brought a significant anthropological I am grateful for comments from analysis of anthropological contributions to the wars of the showdown, with implications for the wars that followed. numerous anonymous AT referees. 20th century. The latter reflects certain professional con- This was the American Anthropological Association’s 1. For more on anthropology cerns of ethics, historically inevitable blind spots associ- (AAA) censure of Franz Boas after he criticized four and warfare see: Berreman ated with the analysis of recent events, and the problems anthropologists who had used their professional positions 1981, Goldschmidt 1979, arising from critical evaluation of the as covers for espionage in Central Leighton 1949, Mabee 1987, Nader 1997a and 1997b, Ross actions of living and recently America (Stocking 1968). To this day 1999, Stocking 1976, Wakin deceased anthropological elders. a general discomfort and ambivalence 1992. While some anthropologists and remains among AAA policy bodies 2. Boas was censured in 1919 not because the facts of his historians have discussed various concerning the merging of anthro- accusation were inaccurate – aspects of anthropological contribu- pology, espionage, covert research indeed contemporary research tions to warfare, these periodic and warfare.2 While a number of indicates the accuracy of his examinations tend to focus more on anthropologists and sociologists claim – but because the AAA disapproved of his position that the specifics of particular military or applied their skills in support of the there was something inherently intelligence campaigns, while the First World War,3 it was the Second wrong with anthropologists larger issues embedded in anthropo- World War that brought the wide- using their professional positions as a front for logical contributions to warfare are spread application of anthropology to 1 espionage (Price 2000, 2001). often downplayed. But downplayed the practice of warfare. 3. During World War I or not, these contributions raise As the Second World War engulfed Durkheim wrote propaganda serious questions concerning the eth- the world in a state of total war, moti- pamphlets, Weber served as an officer in the German Army ical implications of using cultural vations of nationalism, internation- Reserve Corps, Westermark knowledge and anthropological alism, racial supremacy and considered and then declined knowledge in the waging of war, and anti-totalitarianism led a variety of espionage work, Veblen was a government analyst until he was reveal fundamental symbiotic links anthropologists into battle both as cit- fired for his support of the IWW. between scholars and state. izens and citizen-as-anthropologist- Others were affected in other Twentieth-century anthropologists soldiers. In this war social scientists ways, for example W.H.R. applied their knowledge and ethnographic skills to warfare were harnessed at new levels as analysts, propagandists, Rivers spent the war treating shell-shocked soldiers in British on many occasions, fighting with both books and guns. foot soldiers, officers and spies. They directed their efforts hospitals, Fritz Graebner was Such uses of anthropology in the past have been problem- at populations both within and outside the boundaries of interned in Australia, while the atic, and the possibility of similar actions today raises a their nations. war experiences of anthropologists such as Ralph number of complex ethical and practical issues – issues that The links between German anthropologists and the Linton and Leslie White cannot be properly addressed until anthropologists con- Nazi regime remain contested. After the war, some influenced their theoretical front the nature and scope of past anthropological contribu- German anthropologists maintained that they had resisted views of culture and the field of tions to warfare. America’s sudden declaration of ‘war on contributing to Nazi goals. For example, in 1946 Franz anthropology. 4. In analysing German terror’ finds most anthropologists with little understanding Termer argued that during the war many German anthro- anthropology during the war, of the ways that anthropologists opposed or contributed to pologists had recognized that German anthropology Alfred Métraux referred to such the wars of the last century. This article briefly describes …was in danger of becoming a servant of colonial propa- strategies of passive resistance as ‘playing possum’ (Métraux the nature and scope of anthropological contributions to the ganda. The wisest among us saw the danger and protected 1948:717). Second World War in order to provide some critical histor- themselves against it. They did their best to have museums and 5. Proctor in fact establishes ical basis for evaluating the meaning and dangers of current research overlooked as otherwise might not have been the case. that ‘The number of faculty in and future military-intelligence uses of anthropology. The (Termer, quoted in Métraux 1948:717)4 the fields of anthropology and prehistory at German applications of anthropology in Asia, Europe and the Robert Proctor’s work on Nazi anthropology finds that universities increased from 150 Americas during World War II raised fundamental ethical ‘anthropology as a profession fared rather well under the in 1931 to 177 in 1940-41 – issues and led to a variety of intended and unintended out- Nazis’, and points out that there were few German anthro- which contrasts, for example with the case of physics, which comes. The discussion below describes some of the ways pologists who opposed the officially sanctioned views of 5 declined from 454 to 380, or that anthropological analysis was used and ignored by the racial science (Proctor 1988:166). With the exception of medicine, which dropped from military, and how some of the most effective anthropolog- isolated individuals such as Karl Saller, few wartime 3,303 to 2,362 over the same ical contributions to the war were directed not against for- German anthropologists opposed Nazi views of race and period’ (Proctor 1988:166). For a list of German anthropologist eign foes, but at the practices of military policy makers. anthropology, and Proctor found ‘disturbingly little evi- members of the Nazi Party see The decisions and actions of anthropologists during dence that anthropologists resisted the expulsion of Jews 14 ANTHROPOLOGY TODAY VOL 18 NO 3, JUNE 2002 from Germany’ (Proctor 1988:164). As Michael anthropology. For many anthropologists, any second Burleigh’s study of the German Ostforscher’s contribu- thoughts concerning the ethics of using anthropology as tions to the Nazi campaigns established, cover for espionage were fleeting. Some anthropologists No one asked these scholars to put their knowledge at the had experiences similar to those of Jack Harris, who went service of the government: they did so willingly and enthusias- to West Africa with William Bascom under the cover of tically… Deportations, resettlements, repatriations and mass conducting anthropological research while actually gath- murder were not sudden visitations from on high, requiring the ering intelligence for the CIA’s institutional predecessor, adoption of some commensurate inscrutable, quasi-religious the Office of Strategic Services (OSS). As Harris later meta-language, but the result of the exact, modern, ‘scientific’ noted, he did this with some reservations, encompassing of persons with card indexes, card-sorting Earnest.A. Hooton (1887-1945) machines, charts, graphs, maps and diagrams. (Burleigh because during my days at Columbia I was told by associates 1988:8) of Boas that he violently opposed using our scientific reputa- Proctor 1988:158. tion as a cover for intelligence