| Old Soldiers Never Die | A Historiographical Essay on Douglas MacArthur | | Author Name | MM/DD/YYYY |
Course Number

|

General Douglas MacArthur, one of America’s greatest military commanders, was in a category that few men have ever been. Douglas MacArthur was born in Little Rock, Arkansas in 1880. Being raised in a military family had a profound effect on MacArthur as a boy and into adulthood. His father, Arthur MacArthur, was a recipient of the Medal of Honor; an award that would later also be bestowed upon Douglas. His grandfather had served on the United States Supreme Court. He attended the United States Military Academy at West Point, where he graduated at the top of his class in 1903. This began his long and illustrious career with the United States Army. After rising through the ranks so quickly that he was promoted to Chief of Staff of the United States Army in 1930, he later decided to retire in 1937.
History, however, was not finished writing the story of Douglas MacArthur. He was later called back to active duty in 1941 and was sent to defend the Philippines against the Japanese forces. He was awarded the Medal of Honor for his efforts in that campaign. It was also during this time that he was promoted to the rank of five-star general; a rank that has only been achieved by five other men in the army, with the exceptions of George Washington and John J. Pershing. MacArthur was then placed in command of the U.S. occupation in Japan after their surrender from 1945 to 1951.
To wrap up his career, he was placed in charge of the United Nations coalition in the Korean War from 1950 to 1951. He was eventually forced to resign his post on April 11, 1951, after Truman pressured him to do so. MacArthur continued to be such an influential figure in America that many thought he would run for the presidency. However, MacArthur made it abundantly clear that he had no intentions of running for public office when he delivered his now famous “Old soldiers never die, they just fade away” speech before an applauding Congress. After many accomplishments in the civilian arena after his retirement, MacArthur died on April 5, 1964 of cirrhosis of the liver at Walter Reed Army Hospital in Washington, D.C. The works featured in this essay focus on MacArthur the man, MacArthur the general, and MacArthur the genius.
It is only fitting to begin the bulk of this essay with MacArthur himself giving some insight into his own life. MacArthur penned Reminiscences, a fitting title for his memoirs, to give clarity to many aspects of his service in the United States Army, why he chose the actions he did, and how he personally viewed the events that shaped his life. The work is a support of his actions and how he hoped he would be measured by the bar of history. It is often the case that men of great stature and personal achievement wish so dearly that they will be viewed upon favorably by the spectacles of time.
Some men cannot bear the thought that they might be looked upon harshly by others for what they viewed as necessary actions. Indeed, MacArthur had a large ego and a brilliant intellect; thus, he had a higher bar of expectations for himself than most men. This is evidenced by the preface of the Reminiscences when he says, “The comments are my own and show how I saw the matters treated of, whether others saw them in the same light or not” (MacArthur vi). He excelled in so many areas, everything from war strategy to oration, that he could likely be considered a perfectionist. He also had time on his side in writing Reminiscences in that he finished it shortly before his death in 1964. So, he wrote his memoirs with the knowledge of many years’ experience. The book takes on a very contemplative yet self-justifying tone. This is not to say that the book is of inferior quality. In fact, it is remarkably well-written and MacArthur was brilliant as always in his composition.
MacArthur does the only logical thing in writing an autobiography; he explains the events of his life chronologically. He begins in his self-assured prose by linking his family’s name to that of King Arthur. This sets the tone for his predisposition of at-times coming off with a sort of “holier than thou” attitude. It is certain MacArthur meant no harm in the way he chose to write, but this could give a reader who was previously unfamiliar with MacArthur the wrong impression of the man. He was very proud of his family, particularly his grandfather. He describes his early influences in such eloquence that only he could muster.
He looked up to the success his grandfather, Arthur MacArthur, Sr. achieved by becoming an associate justice of the Supreme Court. Many times throughout history people have used the successes of their ancestors as motivation as well as political clout. MacArthur is no different. With a grandfather on the Supreme Court and a father who is awarded a Medal of Honor, chances are a person would be highly motivated toward whatever goals they set for themselves in life, as MacArthur was. One particular instance involving his grandfather was about a patent case with Henry Clay and Daniel Webster as the opposing attorneys. MacArthur described how Clay eloquently spoke for hours about how a device was different than the other device in question. Then, eventually Webster sat the device down in front of the jury and said, “There they are. If you can see any difference between them it is more than I can.” Webster won the case (MacArthur 5). The lesson to be taught was to never talk more than is necessary. MacArthur admitted sheepishly that this was a lesson he still had trouble with at times.
MacArthur presents himself as someone who possesses the necessary attributes for success. He tells of how he scored the highest scholastic achievement in 25 years at West Point. However, never in the book does his telling of stories seem overbearing. Given the facts of his life, it is not hard to believe that MacArthur often saw the bigger picture a little more clearly than most. At times, he even seems a little too modest. It is in those times that one has a harder time believing the general. Men of such caliber are few and far between, and do not come along every day. Some people are meant for excellence. The paths by which they achieve that excellence may vary wildly, but the end result is the same.
As far as factual accounts of his life, MacArthur is very honest; at least as honest as he could be given the top-security clearance he had and the information he could not divulge. In fact, he writes of several occasions where he got into arguments with colleagues or superiors. It is obvious to say that in order for a person to ascend the ranks as quickly as MacArthur did, you must have excellent interpersonal skills. That is not to say, however, that upon that ascension some people will not be offended. Also is the case that people of high rank have such strong personalities that they conflict at times. While MacArthur was an excellent speaker, he would always stand firm on a given issue, even if that meant he stood in stark contrast to others. Somehow, MacArthur never had any doubts about what he thought was right or wrong. He always possessed a surety which few people do. He believed that he did his job to the fullest of his capabilities given to him by God. A conviction that strong shows in a person’s actions.
One section where MacArthur completely loses the credibility of objectivity is in the section of the book titled “Frustration in Korea.” MacArthur, as head of the UN coalition in Korea, had taken the fight to the Koreans and had essentially secured victory in Korea until the Chinese intervened and pushed the troops beyond the 38th parallel and into South Korea. It was after this that MacArthur was officially relieved of duty by President Truman. He expressed considerable disdain for Truman even at the time the book was written. He poses that he in fact did not wish to continue onto Chinese soil if it wasn’t necessary.
He explains it this way: “This put the cart before the horse—I only wanted to end the war, not to spread it. I had not started it, and many times had stated, ‘Anyone in favor of sending American ground troops to fight on Chinese soil should have his head examined’” (MacArthur 389). He is staunchly anti-Communist and upholds the idea that Korea should have been united as a single, democratic country. He was a true believer in the statement that “There is no substitute for victory.” With today’s information society being so pervasive in everyone’s lives, it is often the case that people don’t get to read in-depth on a subject; they merely skim the surface, leaving out the most important details. This book is an excellent source for truly understanding the life of one of the greatest generals in history.
While Reminiscences is a great first-hand account of MacArthur’s life, a somewhat even better detailed biography is presented in American Caesar: Douglas MacArthur 1880-1964 by William Manchester. Manchester presents MacArthur as the dichotomous personality he truly was. He shows how MacArthur was at once a hero and at least a little villainous. He asserts that MacArthur often times let his greed for power and victory consume him. This is a hard pill to swallow for many die-hard MacArthur fans, but a valid point nonetheless. It was ultimately MacArthur’s megalomaniacal attitude that got him fired from his post. Still, in all likelihood he thought he was justified in his actions; at least that is his proposal in Reminiscences. Manchester goes for an in-depth analysis of the military leader and is broadly successful. The key to understanding MacArthur’s actions is to understand the circumstances in which he was constantly under. Many people to this day find him to be an irascible commander, which justifiably might tarnish his image in the minds of many. While at times Manchester takes a pessimistic stance of MacArthur’s actions, he balances out those instances by reporting favorably of him in other cases.
The infamous comparison Manchester makes in this book is by way of likening MacArthur to Julius Caesar. He states the following of the two commanders:
Most of all, however, MacArthur was like Julius Caesar: bold, aloof, austere, egotistical, willful. The two generals surrounded themselves with servile aides-de-camp; remained long abroad, one as proconsul and the other as shogun, leading captive peoples in unparalleled growth; loved history; were fiercely grandiose and spectacularly fearless; and reigned as benevolent autocrats. (Manchester 8)
Never does the author doubt MacArthur’s intellectual capabilities. In fact, he finds that MacArthur is in possession of a top-notch mind. This is evidenced by the fact that he graduated at the top of his class at West Point. He even goes so far as to equate MacArthur’s mind to that of Napoleon Bonaparte, considered by many to be the greatest military leader of all time. Though Manchester has no trouble pointing out MacArthur’s genius, he also shows no hesitation in pointing out his perceived flaws. According to Manchester, MacArthur could not get enough recognition. He was constantly in search of adulation and that was his primary imperfection. It was that pride that led to weakening ties with Washington. It was that very same pride that aroused President Truman’s anger and caused him to humiliate the general by forcing his resignation. Of particular interest in American Caesar is the section where the author deals with MacArthur’s role as Supreme Commander of Japan following the end of World War II. Manchester seems to be very impressed by the mettle and merit MacArthur showed at this time. From assisting in the drafting of a Constitution to helping rebuild the Japanese economy (at which he was tremendously successful) MacArthur never lost sight of the bigger picture. Manchester seems to be in awe of MacArthur’s handling of the Japanese as Occupation Commander. He describes an instance shortly after MacArthur landed in Japan where he and all of his staff were served steaks. One person thought that maybe the meat had been poisoned and suggested that a Japanese person taste it first. “MacArthur laughed and shook his head; it was good meat and he didn’t want to share it with anyone” (Manchester 447). Even though it is obvious that Manchester is highly impressed by MacArthur in Japan, he still maintains a sense of neutrality in his style.
His pride notwithstanding, MacArthur “had invested new meanings in the concepts of honor, intrepidity, and idealism” (Manchester 11). It is this kind of admission of MacArthur’s excellence that makes the reader feel as though they are being given a fair shake. Manchester presents multiple sides to each story, thus allowing readers to choose for themselves where they might place MacArthur in the annals of history. A sense of objectivity in a writer’s work provides for a more satisfying reading experience and a more credible position. For this, Manchester excels above standard and writes a superb biography. It is for the previously mentioned reasons that American Caesar can be considered the finest publication of the subject of MacArthur’s life.
Another influential work on MacArthur is called No Substitute for Victory: Lessons in Strategy and Leadership from General Douglas MacArthur by Theodore and Donna Kinni. The general purpose of this book is to introduce a newer generation to the great mind of MacArthur. The authors start from the very beginning by saying that MacArthur’s career “demonstrated the meaning of leadership” (Kinni xiv). This book essentially goes into great detail as to why the authors consider MacArthur to be one of the greatest leaders in history. Certainly, his accomplishments have rarely, if ever, been equaled. One would have to be facetious to doubt the distinction of MacArthur’s service to his country. He was a patriot the likes of which is almost never seen. Hence, the book takes lessons from many points in MacArthur’s life and translates them to learning effective leadership capacity. While this book is primarily targeted toward management in the financial sector, the principles therein can be applied to nearly every walk of life.
The authors take an unabashedly favorable stance on MacArthur. For the purposes of this book, criticism of the general is virtually nonexistent. It is a continual praise party for MacArthur and his achievements. However, with the intentions of being a how-to book designed to lift one’s management capabilities, it only makes sense that the authors would shy away from the negative aspects of MacArthur’s life. No Substitute is an informative book that when implemented correctly, could be very useful for leadership training in many areas. The authors outline three founding principles of exceptional leadership: values, vision, and proficiency. They emphasize the importance of moral virtue. One can be an effective leader without morals, but the absence of morality negates any positives of the situation. Prime examples would be the leaders of Enron or Bernie Madoff: Seemingly competent leaders mired in filth by their failings of conscience. If more leaders would stand up and do the right thing, the business world would be a much better place.
The success of No Substitute comes from the fact that the fifty principles included are universal. The authors claim (believably) that MacArthur applied these guidelines in his daily life and their application skyrocketed him up the ladder of success. They cite his accomplishments in many different positions as being no accident. MacArthur implemented a system, whether he consciously knew every step of it or not. He lived in a world of absolutes. If an order was given, it was absolutely followed, if an action was necessary in MacArthur’s mind, dawdling had absolutely no place. The similarities between the MacArthur in Reminiscences and the MacArthur in No Substitute are startling. Both depict a man imperviously self-assured in his actions. It seems as though many of history’s great leaders have shown the same trait of self-assurance. There have been an extraordinary number of events where a fighting force was either outnumbered, outgunned, or both, and the commander of the smaller force led his warriors into battle and onto victory or near-victory.
Such was the case with MacArthur in the Battle of Bataan. His troops were severely outnumbered but they persisted. They were eventually defeated by the Japanese forces but the damage was done. They had succeeded in slowing down the progression of the Japanese. Without the Battle of Bataan, all of the Pacific U.S. bases could have quite feasibly been overrun in a short period of time. The U.S. later went on to reclaim the Bataan peninsula in 1945. So, even though MacArthur felt the sting of a military defeat, in some senses it was a victory. Though, if he were alive today, the authors would surely think that he would say, “There is no substitute for victory.”
In essence, the lessons in the book are grouped into five categories, with supporting evidence from MacArthur’s career to back them up. The first grouping is to define victory and pursue it relentlessly until victory is achieved. The second is to use every weapon at your disposal; one cannot underestimate the value of surprise and speed of attack. Third, readers are urged to get a good start, to take command and establish trust. Fourth, a never-say-die attitude and the proper use of language hold an inestimable benefit. Lastly, keeping solid values and never ceasing to learn influence your performance in the future dramatically. This type of book shows just how complex military or any leadership for that matter can truly be. The authors do a splendid job in clarifying potentially confusing parts and keeping the reader interested. This book would serve as an excellent reminder of the benefits are diligence and preparedness. Just as Sun-Tzu’s Art of War is considered the go-to text of its kind, so too should this book be given to any entrepreneur with high aspirations. High aspirations were exactly what MacArthur had when he presided over Japan and Korea. One book that deals with MacArthur’s campaigns in those countries is The Riddle of MacArthur: Japan, Korea and the Far East by John Gunther.
The Riddle is most specifically about the time in MacArthur’s life when he was advanced in age, yet still going strong. While the primary focus is on MacArthur’s ardent leadership as Supreme Commander of the Occupation of Japan, it also wanders from time to time to aspects of MacArthur’s other Asian operations, such as his role as Supreme Commander of the U.N. coalition. One of the most interesting facets of this book is the fact that it was written in 1951, when MacArthur was still in Korea and Japan. It differs in this way from the other works discussed because they were all written after the events discussed in their pages. Therefore, it is safe to say that Gunther will naturally have a different point-of-view of MacArthur than the other authors. That is a nice concept because it provides variety in expression of opinions by each of the unique authors.
Gunther, writing in a time during which there was mayhem in Asia, naturally has a very positive opinion of General MacArthur. After all, he was maintaining order in Japan, and attempting to gain order in the Korean peninsula. At home in the U.S., MacArthur was a national hero with insurmountable levels of popularity. In fact, his popularity was so high that many thought he would make a perfect candidate for president. MacArthur had shown himself to be highly competent in leading the world’s greatest military and a lot of people thought those leadership skills would translate well to the presidency. Also, MacArthur had a knack for saying the right thing at the right time. Gunther includes a quote MacArthur made on his birthday in 1950 that said, “Modern war is so destructive that it must be outlawed completely. Civilization as we know it will be destroyed if world leaders fail in their responsibility to find a solution to the problems and permit a third world war” (Gunther xii). Such a quote suggests that Gunther thought MacArthur, with his firsthand knowledge of the perils of war, knew the true costs of conflict and would be a good judge to lead the country.
A remarkable comparison Gunther makes is likening MacArthur to Julius Caesar. This is noteworthy because Manchester made the same comparison in American Caesar. However, Gunther’s book was written prior to Manchester’s, so it is quite feasible to conjecture that Manchester’s opinion was affected by Gunther’s book. Gunther calls MacArthur the Caesar of the Pacific while Manchester called him the American Caesar. Gunther tries to remain objective in his writing about MacArthur but is unsuccessful at times. He simply cannot hide his adoration of the general. However, he does note from time to time that he is not particularly fond of MacArthur being so overly confident.
One flagrant advantage this book has over the other books is that Gunther could interview people of the time on their thoughts of MacArthur and thoughts of the Occupation in general, and he did quite often. He took time to conduct a lot of in-person research whereas most of the other authors presumably wrote their books based mostly on information from other written sources. This generates a sense of journalistic reporting that the other books lack as well. Journalists typically have their own exclusive style of writing. Gunther includes everything from his views on MacArthur to his opinions on Japan, to the prices of items such as eggs and various liquors. Such writing gives the reader a feel as though they are present with the author. This makes for a more personal touch in the final product and ultimately fashions an interesting read that is easy to absorb.
Gunther actually spends of a lot of space on describing extraneous things. At times he ventures far away from the topic of MacArthur. An interesting point he makes is when talking about the end of the war with Japan he states, “Einstein won the war” (Gunther 103). A complete way to look at Gunther’s book is not to focus solely on MacArthur but to look at all the surrounding events/people and how they interacted to arrive in the present day. Nonetheless, the emphasis of this paper lies on General MacArthur. An enormously appealing section occurs in chapter ten where Gunther writes on the conflict between MacArthur and President Truman. He includes all of the aggravating factors. He says, “—some sort of argument, if not conflict, was inevitable between them. Civilian versus officer; Democrat versus Republican; politician versus soldier; commander-in-chief versus subordinate—all this played a role” (Gunther 193). This is a pretty accurate description of the situation that fueled the fire between MacArthur and Truman.
The biggest sticking point between the general and the president was the fundamental question of who was boss. This was a question which the two men could not seem to come to an agreement on. Gunther compares Truman to Rome and MacArthur to Caesar; a comparison which is actually very fitting. While MacArthur disagreed so vehemently with Truman on some issues, he did not cross certain lines in his disputes with the president. He was, after all, a patriot to the core and first and foremost he respected the chain of order. Conversely, the two men possessed such conflicting ideologies that it was only a matter of time before things would come to a head.
One instance where there was a precipitous increase in tensions between the two men happened when MacArthur made a visit to Taiwan (formerly Formosa) to assess the state of affairs. The huge reception MacArthur received as a representative of the United States gave the wrong impression to the people of Taiwan and Chiang Kai-shek’s administration. Kai-shek himself even said, “The foundation for Sino-American military cooperation has been laid” (Gunther 195) suggesting that the U.S. was in full support of the Chiang’s government. This was a drastic action on the part of the general and he must have known how his visit would be seen by the Taiwanese people. This understandably did not sit well with Truman. In fact he was quite furious. It is the chief executive’s place to dictate foreign policy. Gunther seems to take the president’s side in this matter; partly due to the fact that MacArthur kept issuing incendiary statements for quite some time after that particular event had happened. Conditions between the two men never did get repaired.
Gunther ends his book by having a question and answer session with himself. It is in this section that he makes clear how he truly feels about MacArthur and his numerous achievements. He believes that MacArthur has done a better job in Japan than perhaps anyone else could, but that he is still far from perfect, and that there is a chance that Japan may not permanently embrace democracy the way MacArthur thinks they will. Obviously, in retrospect, we now realize that there was great success in Japan. They recovered from their defeat in World War II to become one of the world’s top economies. The United States and Japan remain allies to this day. While Gunther’s book was a good present-day assessment in its time, Stanley Weintraub’s book 15 Stars delivers an excellent estimation of MacArthur’s achievements with the knowledge of hindsight as an asset.
15 Stars is a close inspection of the relationship between three of the finest military commanders the world has ever produced: Dwight Eisenhower, George Marshall, and last but not least, Douglas MacArthur. Marshall was managing things stateside from the Pentagon, Eisenhower was Supreme Allied Commander in Europe, and MacArthur was Supreme Allied Commander in the Southwest Pacific Theater. Each of these generals had an extreme work load to deal with, not to mention managing those soldiers under their command. One can only imagine the difficulty Patton presented at times. Luckily, the three men were so professionally competent that even under such extreme conditions they thrived. Eisenhower later went on to enjoy the most post-war success when he was elected president. Then again, many people still to this day agree that MacArthur would have made a prime candidate for president.
Weintraub masterfully weaves the story he tells together by interconnecting the stories of the three men together. The stories all intersect with one another. It would be difficult to distinguish one particular section of the book that includes MacArthur without also including one or both of the other generals. That is the outright goal of the book; a goal which Weintraub clearly meets. Weintraub attempts to compare the strengths and weaknesses of each man to the others. He provides several examples of ways in which the men are alike and many more in which they differ strikingly. One of the biggest speculative comments Weintraub makes is that, “Presidential talk long hovered about them. But for the twists of circumstance, all three—rather than only one—might have occupied the White House” (Weintraub xi). He compares them to the whole of America: with MacArthur representing the city, Marshall the suburbs, and Eisenhower the country. While the men interacted a good deal in World War II, their interactions were not always friendly. The author does a brilliant job of telling all three men’s stories while at the same time keeping an air of objectivity and mostly not choosing sides.
One of the principal shortcomings of 15 Stars is that it leaves out too much in terms of how the war was actually executed. The book rarely goes into specifics in talking about war strategy; instead the reader is left with a lot of generally discussed events. While such information is good for gaining better insight into MacArthur’s psyche for instance, it does little in the way of explaining the particulars of how or why he acted the way he did in the small details of the war. At least by providing the reader with attributes of the men it paints a picture of how they were outside of dealing with war. While Marshall and Eisenhower were both temperate and unassuming, MacArthur is shown to be the feisty, intensely aggressive member of the group. This was important, because to have a productive team, you need members with different strengths. Eisenhower, MacArthur, and Marshall were all sufficiently different from one another. So different, in fact, that with their combined knowledge and prowess they made a terror of a fighting force. It was their ability to work with one another even through disputes that enabled such efficiency in their leadership. Each man knew that following the chain of command and respecting your equals and subordinates was important to keeping morale high, and to keeping the military the smooth-running machine that it needs to be.
The section of this book that shines above the rest is the part that covers the post-World War II material. At that point, Eisenhower and Marshall were done with fighting. Only MacArthur would return to the battlefield as commander in a conflict after 1945. There are times when Weintraub responds unfavorably to MacArthur for his actions. It appears as though he thinks MacArthur to be somewhat arrogant in his ways. In all honesty though, if MacArthur could have seen how he projected himself at times, there is a good possibility he would have seen himself as at least a little haughty. One such quote that sums up his superiority complex is given in reference to Eisenhower and is as follows:
He used to be an aide of mine in the Philippines, and he hasn’t changed a whit. If I had to know something that I had forgotten, he made a good enough aide-mémoire, but if I wanted a plan of something, a scheme worked out, he would always turn up some crackbrain scheme that wouldn’t work in years. Hopeless. (Weintraub 391) Of all the texts featured in the essay, by far the two most captivating are American Caesar and Reminiscences. The former gives an honest look at the military genius and egotistical overbearingness of MacArthur. It shows the duality of his persona. For all of his strengths, which were many, he also had his share of shortcomings. He was human, and humans are not perfect by any measure. Reminiscences details first-hand with how MacArthur felt about his life and how he performed in his duties. It provides that warmth of intimate knowledge that can only be received from an autobiography. MacArthur knew he wasn’t perfect, but he unmistakably felt that it couldn’t hurt to try.

Works Cited
Gunther, John. The Riddle of MacArthur: Japan, Korea and the Far East. New York: Harper & Brothers, 1951. Print.
Kinni, Donna and Theodore Kinni. No Substitute for Victory: Lessons in Strategy and Leadership from General Douglas MacArthur. New York: FT Press, 2005. Print.
MacArthur, Douglas. Reminiscences. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1964. Print.
Manchester, William. American Caesar: Douglas MacArthur 1880-1964. New York: Little, Brown and Company, 1978. Print.
Weintraub, Stanley. 15 Stars: Eisenhower, MacArthur, Marshall: Three Generals Who Saved the American Century. New York: Free Press, 2007. Print.