AMERICA’S CULTURE WARS AND THE CLASSROOM HIROSHIMA By Leo Maley III and Uday Mohan The dominant American view of Hiroshima and Nagasaki owes much to what people felt when they first heard about the bombings fifty years ago. In 1945, many Americans believed the Japanese got what they deserved when we bombed those two cities. An August 1945 Gallup poll showed 85 percent of the public approving of the use of the atomic bombs on Japanese cities.1 A second poll, published in the December 1945 issue of Fortune, a leading business magazine, is even more revealing. It showed 53.5 percent of the American public believing we “should have used the two bombs on cities, just as we did.” An additional 22.7 percent believed that we “should have quickly used many more of them [atomic bombs] before Japan had a chance to surrender.”2 For Americans of the World War II gener- Nagasaki. Scholarship critical of the ation, the passage of fifty years has not widely-held belief that it was necessary to significantly altered attitudes concerning use atomic bombs on Japanese cities has America’s use of the atomic bomb. When steadily accumulated since the 1960s.5 asked to “remember Hiroshima,” many But because most textbooks fail to incor- still angrily respond by evoking Pearl porate or emphasize the latest atomic Harbor or the Bataan Death March.3 A bomb scholarship, and few college cours- substantial number of Americans have es focus on Hiroshima in any depth, the passed down family memories of death accumulating scholarship has had limited and survival in the Pacific war. Many of effect. For their part, the media ignore, these veterans and their families continue with limited though sometimes striking to believe that the atomic bomb saved exceptions, the impressive body of evi- their own lives or the lives of loved ones. dence and argument that runs counter to Half a century after the end of the war, the official justifications for the atomic many still “thank God” for the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.6 bomb, and they are contemptuous of his- The National Air and Space torians who question the necessity of the Museum’s plans for a 1995 exhibit on the bombings.4 end of World War II and its nuclear after- In contrast, for some time it has been math was in many ways a watershed for possible for American academics to chal- American thinking about Hiroshima. This lenge the dominant justifications for the V. J. Day, Aug. 15, 1945, Paris was the first nationally prominent effort atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Photo: National Archives to make use of, however cautiously, some 32 EDUCATION ABOUT ASIA Volume 2, Number 2 Fall 1997 It was in this context—of tenaciously of the newer critical scholarship on the held myths about Hiroshima, but also of bomb decision. Museum curators had signs that the myths are unstable—that we intended to acknowledge the continuing had the opportunity in the fall of 1995 to intense debate about the decision among teach a 15-week undergraduate seminar historians, as well as the diversity of opin- titled “Hiroshima: History, Ethics, and ions among American military, scientific, Memory” under the auspices of the and political leaders concerning the University Honors Program at the bombings. University of Maryland, College Park. Unfortunately, the proposed exhibit Our primary goal was to have our and the meaning of Hiroshima became class of 18, only one of whom was a his- deeply embroiled in America’s accelerat- tory major, converse and write thoughtful- ing “culture wars.” Scholars who raised ly about what remains a highly contested critical questions about the atomic bomb- historical event. While we had our stu- ings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were dents read some hibakusha (atomic bomb pejoratively labeled “revisionists,” or survivors) testimonies, including poetry even “cultists”; and Smithsonian curators by Kurihara Sadako, we maintained an were called “politically correct pinheads” almost exclusively American focus in our among other names.7 Conservative veter- course. We wanted to explore with our ans and their allies wished to banish any students the multifaceted ways that interpretation that might draw into ques- American media, historians, scientists, tion the legitimacy of momentous deci- THE 1990 POLL also ethicists, and others have responded to the sions made fifty years ago. As Peter moral and political challenge of Blute, at the time a Congressman from indicated that: Hiroshima. Like the title of Robert J. Massachusetts, stated, “I would hate to n one in four Americans Lifton and Greg Mitchell’s recent book, think that young people in this country we wanted our students to grapple with would go into our national museum and did not recall that an Hiroshima in America.12 view an exhibit and come out of that Our course considered what is now exhibit and say to themselves, ‘Weren’t atomic bomb had known about the decision to use the atom- 8 we wrong?’” been used against an ic bomb, as well as the historical, ethical, The somewhat greater openness of and commemorative voices that have vied the media to questions about the bomb enemy in wartime. to determine the meaning of Hiroshima decision during the summer of 1995 sug- over the past fifty years. We wanted our gests that the forced cancellation of the THE 1995 POLL also students to examine the relationship Smithsonian exhibit and the marginaliza- showed that: between government, war, and the writing tion of historians in the media during of history: How did President Truman 1994 do not reflect the final word on n 60 percent did not (and other top government officials) American understanding of Hiroshima. explain the use of the bomb? What does Some poll numbers bear this out. A know that Truman current scholarship tell us about the deci- Gallup poll conducted in July 1990 was the president sion-making that led to the bomb’s use? showed that Americans split about evenly We also wanted them to reflect on public when asked if they approve or disapprove who authorized the consent: What factors contributed to pub- of the use of the atomic bombs against lic “consent” to the bomb’s use? What Japan.9 According to a 1995 America’s atomic bombings. role did the media play in shaping public Talking/Gallup poll, 49 percent of the n 35 percent opinion? What responsibility do citizens American public say they would have have for decisions made “in their name”? tried means other than the bomb to force did not know that We planned to discuss the topic of com- Japan to surrender in World War II.10 It memoration: How have Americans com- is worth noting that the latter poll was Hiroshima was the memorated the use of the bomb? How has taken soon after the months-long barrage target of the first the tension between commemoration and of propaganda against the planned history played out in the media and in the Smithsonian exhibit.11 atomic bomb. conflict over the recently canceled Photo: President Truman at Potsdam, July 26, 1945. Larousse Editions, Paris 33 Perhaps our students’ willingness to question American orthodoxies Smithsonian exhibit? How should we—as about Hiroshima cabinet (Henry Stimson and James Americans—remember Hiroshima? Byrnes), and General Leslie Groves (who We also considered issues of ethics reflects poll data directed the project that developed the and law: Are there ethical limits to the atomic bombs) with what scholars now conduct of war? What rights does an showing young know about the decision. The picture that enemy have in wartime? What did Americans to be less emerges is one of self-deception among American military leaders think of the American leaders and the willful mislead- atomic bombing of Hiroshima and supportive than older ing of the American public through sup- Nagasaki? How did the atomic scientists pression of information and the construc- view their role in the making and use of Americans of the tion of an official and misleading history the bomb? Is scientific research morally Hiroshima and of the decision to use the bomb. This offi- neutral, or do scientists have a particular cial history includes the infamous and social responsibility? Was the use of the Nagasaki bombings. endlessly repeated myth that the bomb atomic bomb a violation of international saved half a million or even a million law? These were the kind of tough, open- American lives. ended questions we wanted our students Our students also read a number of to grapple with for a semester.13 essays that take issue with Alperovitz’s The principal text for our course was interpretations. In one essay, for example, Gar Alperovitz’s 1995 book, The Barton Bernstein, a leading historian of Decision to Use the Atomic Bomb and the the bomb decision, argues that most Architecture of an American Myth.14 In American leaders did not question or addition, our students read John Hersey’s challenge the bomb’s use. For Truman, Hiroshima, nearly sixty essays and book the weapon, conceived under Franklin D. excerpts, several newspaper editorials, Roosevelt, appeared legitimate, and its and some poems. We also showed a brief use seemed necessary and desirable.16 documentary film and excerpts from tele- Another essay, emphasizing Japanese vision news programs. wartime fanaticism and questioning the The first half of Alperovitz’s book is seriousness of Japanese peace feelers, the most detailed and heavily documented defended President Truman’s decision to analysis to date of the decision to use the use atomic weapons.17 We also had as a atomic bomb.15 Alperovitz argues from guest speaker J.