Customer Reviews: Read 4 more reviews...
 It really opened my eyes December 12, 2007
2 out of 3 found this review helpful
After I read the four chapters in Ann Coulter's book Godless, in which she supposedly refutes Darwin's theory of evolution, I would have sworn I had just encountered the world's greatest charlatan. But then I read Hiroshima in America. It really opened my eyes. When it comes to charlatanism, Coulter is an amateur compared to Robert Lifton and Greg Mitchell. Like Coulter, Lifton and Mitchell are convincing only because most people have at best superficial acquaintance with the topic at hand and they tend to be predisposed to the author's views before they start.
Lifton and Mitchell claim that the Japanese government wanted to surrender before the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and that we knew this to be the case through our intercepts of communications to Japanese embassies. They are correct. What they fail to mention is that the Japanese government was not running Japan in 1945. The military was running the country and it mattered very little what Foreign Minister Togo or even Emperor Hirohito wanted. Government ministers who resisted military domination could be assassinated (Prime Minister Inukai Tsuyoshi in 1932 for example). American policy makers knew there were Japanese leaders who wanted to surrender soon but they also realized that these were not the people making the decisions.
Lifton and Mitchell also claim that the leaders of Japan would have surrendered if only we had made clear to them that they could retain the emperor. Again, they disregard facts to the contrary. In particular, at the crucial meeting of Japanese leaders on August 9-10, 1945, in which the conditions for accepting the Potsdam Declaration were discussed, three of these leaders added additional conditions for surrendering. These were: no Allied occupation of Japan, no Allied-directed war crimes trials of Japanese leaders and no Allied-controlled disarmament of Japan. The militarists would be left unscathed and could hope for better days. This was the mistake made by the Allies with regard to Germany after World War I. It was because of the atomic bombings that the other three conditions desired by the militarists were dropped.
These are just two of the numerous deficiencies of Hiroshima In America. Every page of this unfortunate book has serious omissions. Robert Lifton and Greg Mitchell have performed a miracle: they have made Ann Coulter look respectable.
 Revision done right November 4, 2007
Hiroshima in America, by Robert Jay Lifton and Greg Mitchell, is an incisive analysis of the distortions of the Hiroshima narrative and exploration of the implications of such distortions on America's national identity. In doing so, the authors focus not on the fateful day the bomb was dropped, but on the half century that followed, "and our struggles with and against what we call the `official narrative'...What the Hiroshima narrative conveys is the justification, even wisdom, of our use of the atomic bomb to save lives and end the war." Hiroshima in America presents a convincing body of evidence that this narrative is in serious need of revision, and that renewal can only come after such revisions are made. Overall, the authors are successful in reaching their stated aims, and the work as a whole shows how the decisions such as the one to drop the atomic bomb can disrupt a nation's narrative, and how secrecy, concealment, and falsification can be employed to smooth over such disruptions in an effort to reaffirm coherence.
Lifton and Mitchell begin by describing the early reaction to the bombing of Hiroshima, following Truman's announcement on...They argue that all the central aspects of what they call the `official narrative' was contained in Truman's speech. The atomic bomb was discussed in terms of other weapons of the day, it was aimed at a military target, and its use was morally defensible insofar as it was used against an aggressor nation who would have fought to the finish, costing hundreds of thousands of American lives. Any challenges to the official narrative were effectively silenced when Harper's published Henry Stimson's article describing the decision-making process. Stimson's article calmly and dispassionately explained that the atomic bomb would not have been dropped had Japan shown clear signs of willingness to surrender, and most importantly, "the atomic bombings did not merely quicken but caused the end of the war" (108). After establishing the official narrative, the authors go on to describe the historical and psychological factors that led to Truman's decision to use the bomb. Following Roosevelt's death, Truman was thrust into an `atrocity-producing situation,' as he was surrounded by advisors who had already committed themselves to using the bomb (119). Furthermore, like many of those involved in the Manhattan project, Truman was attracted to the sheer power of the atomic bomb. As a man who prided himself on his ability to act decisively, and perhaps feeling the need to establish himself in the wake of Roosevelt's death, Truman's decision is seen as the result of a level of insecurity coupled with countless pressures from all sides.
While Truman stood by his decision throughout his life, those that followed faced an ongoing struggle with the decision, on the part of presidents, journalists and historians, scientists, war veterans, and peace activists. Lifton and Mitchell note that no president has contested Truman's decision while in office, and a number of presidents have expressed their willingness to use the atomic bomb themselves, if need be. The authors conclude this section with a discussion of the Smithsonian's Enola Gay controversy, which pitted scholars and curators against veterans and senators who saw the exhibit's `revisionism' as anti-American. The debate ended in an exhibition that reaffirmed the stability of the official narrative (296). The final section discusses the long-term psychological, moral, and political implications of the decision to drop the atomic bomb. The American public has largely supported the decision while experiencing severe anxiety towards the atomic age. Also, a moral inversion was required to view the catastrophe as a preserver, rather than a destroyer of life; to avoid culpability and invoke virtue in the act (307). Finally, the secrecy and concealment that surrounded the Manhattan Project itself and the long-term effects of radiation, both on Japanese and Americans, set a precedent that authors see echoes of in Vietnam, Watergate, and Iran-Contra (332). Despite the dismal picture previously described, the authors show signs of hope in their conclusion: "Confronting Hiroshima can be a powerful source of renewal. It can enable us to emerge from nuclear entrapment and rediscover our imaginative capacities on behalf of human good" (356).
In the end, what the reader finds in Hiroshima in America is a picture of a nation dealing with an identity crisis. The atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki disrupts a nationalist narrative grounded on America's moral supremacy, requiring historical distortions, psychological conditioning, and moral inversions to retain a sense of coherence. Lifton and Mitchell suggests that we are experiencing "a `Hiroshima syndrome' that prevents us from taking a truly moral stand on the weaponry, lest our 1945 actions in Hiroshima and Nagasaki become retrospectively unethical and unlawful--in the eyes of the world and, still more troubling, our own eyes as well" (313).
 Fifty Years to over analyze September 13, 2006
5 out of 8 found this review helpful
Hiroshima had such an enormous historical impact on the world that it is important study and re-examine its context in modern history. This book concentrates on how the dropping of the bomb has influenced our country's psyche over the 50 years since its detonation.
A very interesting topic, becasue the dropping of the bomb influences our daily lives even today. However, the book's authors are clearly "anti bomb" and this sentiment permeates everything they write. Another distraction are the authors foray into psycho-babble. Section II of the book is devoted almost entirely to analyzing Trumans actions, including psycho analysis of the man based on quotes from public speeches. That got a little too much.
However, there were some really interesting things contained within the pages. The examination of how the story of the bomb would be told to the public, and the disinformation generated, is fascinating.
The best of the book would have to be the Smithsonian exhibit controversy. It was a boiling point for both sides of the issue and it really demonstrated how passionate Americans are about being the first to drop the bomb. After 50 years of strong feelings from both sides of the arguement they waged war with each other over an important examination of our history. The Smithsonian lost.
Take away the psycho babble and over analysis of many key players involved in the building and dropping of the bomb (can the authors really conclude that Truman is living in denial from select speech excerpts), and take away the overt "anti" stance that leaves the reader questioning the completeness of the information presented, and the book would have been much better.
There is still a lot of good information in this book (propaganda, other motives for dropping the bomb, vetran views...) and the authors do raise a lot of valid questions, but the reader feels that these questions need to be substantiated from other sources because of the authors "anti" views.
 Truly eye opening February 5, 2006
3 out of 5 found this review helpful
This book is the best information I have seen on this tragic event. Read it, understand what we did.
good discussion starter August 7, 2005
8 out of 10 found this review helpful
The previous reviewers did a good job explaining what the book was about. I'll add the following: the authors discuss President Truman's role in making the decision to drop the bomb and seem to indicate that he was more or less a consent giver in this process rather than the decision maker.
Also, the authors explain why any exploration of this topic seems to spark outrage and resentment in the U. S., especially among military veterans.
Because of this book, I think that I will be better able to discuss this issues in a way that won't make people feel as if they are being attacked.
|
