comment by b

a thoughtful web.

Good ideas and conversation. No ads, no tracking. Login or Take a Tour!

comment by b_b

b_b · 4790 days ago · link · · parent · post: How far car safety has come: head on collision test, 1959 Chevy Bel Air v. 2009 Chevy Malibu

And Robert S. McNamara. Everyone remembers him as the architect of the Viet Nam war, but before he was Sec'y of Defense, he was the President of Ford Motor Company, where he was responsible for putting seat belts in cars for the first time, perhaps the most important safety feature on any car even today.

markup tips · 0

illu45 · 4789 days ago · link ·

Actually, according to wp, Nash Motors were the first to put seatbelts in cars, while Saab was the first company to have seat belts as standard, although Ford motors was one of the early adopters, and did a fair bit of marketing around seat belts. That said, I think most of the credit really should go to Nils Bohlin, who invented seat belts to begin with.

+discuss+discuss

thenewgreen · 4790 days ago · link ·

I remember pointing out McNamara's work at Ford Mo Co. to a family friend that had survived the Vietnam war to come home and protest it. He wouldn't hear of any such accomplishments, he loathed the documentary "The Fog of War" too. As far as he was concerned, McNamara was the devil.

But yes, he did some damned good work at Ford. He was one of their wiz kids. He sure crapped the bed with Vietnam though.

+discuss+discuss

–

b_b · 4790 days ago · link ·

The Fog of War is difficult to understand, if you're not already familiar with Errol Morris' other movies. His philosophy of documentary making is to set up a camera and get his interview subjects to talk as long as possible, while asking as few questions as possible. In this respect, you can appreciate that Morris wanted to get a record of what happened in Vietnam from a high level official, and to be able to reflect on what went wrong.

I don't think he was in any way trying to be an apologist for RSM, but it kind of seems that way if its his only movie you've seen. For example, Morris is a Jew who once dedicated an entire movie to a hero of the Holocaust denier movement, Fred Leuchter (Titled Mr. Death: The Rise and Fall of Fred A. Leuchter, Jr., its an amazing film, also). The style is the same (as it is with most of his movies); let the guy talk, and let the audience decide what the real meaning of his words are.

+discuss+discuss

–

thenewgreen · 4790 days ago · link ·

I appreciate his style, very much so. I actually loved the Fog of War for this reason. It's just difficult for some people to let go of the anger they have toward someone like McNamara, I don't think he took issue with Errol Morris at all. Like you say, "His philosophy of documentary making is to set up a camera and get his interview subjects to talk as long as possible", he can't be held accountable for what they say and what they don't.

+discuss+discuss

–

b_b · 4790 days ago · link ·

And I think its reasonable for a lot of people to despise him. If I were forced to go half way around the world to fight a meaningless war for unclear reasons, I also would despise those responsible for it. Basically, the US government was saying to all these young men, "Your life is so worthless to us, that we'll send you to war, even though we're not even sure what it is we're fight for."

Unfortunately, we didn't learn the lesson we all thought we did. I think that's one of the reasons Morris made the movie. It was a direct finger wagging at the Iraq War.

+discuss+discuss

–

thenewgreen · 4789 days ago · link ·

Some mistakes we are doomed to repeat, it seems. This discussion has made me want to re-watch it.

+discuss+discuss

mk · 4790 days ago · link ·

IMO the tough part about watching McNamara in The Fog of War, was that he was trying to speak across a chasm. It was as if he was trying to make the public understand why we kill young kids over political maneuvers and diplomatic misunderstandings. As if he just told it how it is, some sense might be made of it. The public is not going to understand that.

They really don't need understand it either. It made little to no sense. Generals rationally wage irrational wars, and I think they sometimes confuse strategy with the rationale.

+discuss+discuss

–

caio · 4786 days ago · link ·

I also felt that. "Here's a guy who is trying to be understood", I thought. Towards the end, when Morris asks him Do you feel in any way responsible for the War? Do you feel guilty?, he's just too tired of explaining himself again and again: I don't want to go any further with this discussion. It just opens up more controversy. I don't want to add anything to Vietnam. It is so complex that anything I say will require additions and qualifications.

Has anyone seen Path to War? It's about the Lyndon Johnson Administration, and much of it concerns the Vietnam War. It has Alec Baldwin as McNamara. Good movie.