“War Pigs”:  A Semiotic/Marxist Analysis of a Political T-Shirt

by Kenneth A. Denison

BIO:  Kenneth A. Denison is a senior at the University of Idaho, completing his degree with the Department of Anthropology.

On a recent trip to San Francisco, California I happened across an interesting t-shirt on display in a local “head-shop” located on Haight Street.  Although our primary mission to the famed Haight/Ashbury region of the city was to view the initial residence of the original members of the Grateful Dead, a magnificent Victorian situated at 710 Ashbury, our group’s attention soon turned to the numerous counter-culture style shops along what my local friend referred to as “the Haight.”  Being a few weeks before the November 2004 Presidential election, I happened upon a prodigious amount of partisan political propaganda on sale at a number of so-called “head shops,” intermingled with other local businesses set up to sell local counter-culture memorabilia.

The black t-shirt that I purchased (after much deliberation) is colored gold and red, depicting the current U.S. President George W. Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney, and the Secretary of State Donald Rumsfeld grouped together, all illustrated with pig snouts for noses beneath the lettered title “War Pigs.”  The sub-title line under the title message reads “evil minds that plot destruction,” while the background is decorated much like the former Japanese imperialist-era rising sun war flag with a Nazi-esque style eagle on display in center of the sun’s rays.  Now, looking back over the course of Bush’s first term, the 2004 election battle and forward to the re-elected President’s second term, I find myself pondering several questions. What conditions would inspire someone to create, sell, purchase or wear such an inflammatory cultural text? What are the implicit and explicit meanings of this anti-Bush t-shirt?

To begin with, I feel that the context within which I discovered this particular text is important, harkening back to earlier, similarly discordant times in our country’s history, the Vietnam era. San Francisco’s Haight/Ashbury district seemed to still reflect the now old, counter-culture-minded mood for which it previously had gained recognition.  It became evident to me by the sort of things on sale at the businesses that the spirit of the 1960’s Haight/Ashbury lives on.  In a couple of stores I happened upon, I found pro-marijuana stickers, t-shirts, colorful glass and water pipes (perhaps intended for smoking marijuana), “adult” videos and toys along with a wide array of anti-conservative, pro-liberal kind of merchandise.  A delight for those consumers inclined to support use of pro-pot or sex-oriented merchandise, stock-up on recreational drug paraphernalia, out-fit oneself with anti-establishment attire, or perhaps, just a place for passing tourists to marvel at the spectacle.  Nonetheless, an unquestionable den of iniquity for those members of the conservative right wing of society, who likely take a dim view of such laissez-faire sexual attitudes and aggressively pro-liberal political opinions.

Indeed, all of the political merchandise I saw the store had to offer was decidedly anti-Bush in nature. For any number of possible grievances one might have with the President, a t-shirt or sticker could be found that would give it voice.  The t-shirts and stickers depictions and themes ranged from lampooning the President and his policies as blundering stupidity to equating the nation’s Commander and Chief with Nazi leadership.  A shirt that my friend purchased was decorated with a large photo of a fireball-explosion taken from war-torn Iraq, the President’s dumbfounded face overlaid, commingled with the message “Liar, Liar, World on Fire.”  As I leafed through the sticker book, I discovered one with Bush lettering, the letter “s” replaced with what most people now recognize as a Nazi swastika.  Another sticker depicted the President in Nazi uniform, Hitler mustache, with arm raised in similar likeness to that of the former leader.  One t-shirt mocked the President’s conception of terrorism as hypocrisy in the fashion of an old Native American photo showing Geronimo along-side three other gun-toting Apache warriors, set with the message:  “Homeland Security, Fighting Terrorism since 1492.”

Suffice to say, I found a significant source of concrete evidence reflective of an acrid, hateful mood against the incumbent Bush within our country.  As I have come to understand the context surrounding as well as this anti-establishment t-shirt itself, to be a poignant sign of the times that has defined Bush’s tenure as President: compelling evidence of a fearful, if not hateful mood in our culturally divided nation.  Moreover, the current media analyses of the 2004 Presidential election results suggest that Bush owes his victory in large part to a right-wing religious constituency.  The main fact I have heard so much about in recent post-election analysis is the claim that many voters cited “moral values,” as their top reason for selecting the President over the challenger John Kerry.  It even seems that the so-called “liberal media” are also engaged in this raging culture war.  After the Bush victory last week, I caught Andy Rooney on Sixty Minutes saying that according to him, it was true that the country is essentially evenly split, politically.  Rooney noted that among his colleagues, “half of them were pro-Kerry and the other half anti-Bush.”

Therefore, it does not seem to be much of a stretch of one’s imagination to suggest that many Bush supporters would indeed find this t-shirt to be offensive attack on their defender of ”moral” values.  The nature of the shirt’s decidedly inflammatory symbolism and contemptuous, disfiguring, portrayal of our nation’s leaders is bound to raise alarm in some Bush-supporter’s minds.  The overall theme of the t-shirt’s symbols run contrary to the notion of George Bush as a moral leader, benevolent champion of freedom or as a reluctant military interventionist.

Upon initial examination of the text, I found the Japanese war flag to be a particularly potent symbol to associate with President Bush.  The unmistakable imagine gleaned from the annals of Japanese war history provides a powerful message linking the President to the former aggressive militarism that Imperialist Japan once engaged in.  The image is particularly striking in its contrary nature, as the President is often staged in front of the stars and stripes of the American flag, not the symbols of an Imperialist government.  The dramatic iconography serves to unambiguously speak the opinion of Bush, Vice President Cheney and Secretary State Rumsfeld as similar in nature or in actions to the formerly aggressive Japanese military in the Second World War.  One of the chief concerns I have heard from those critics of the President’s foreign policy is the war in Iraq and his intentions of creating of a stronghold in the region through long-term involvement and covetousness of the important stocks of oil located there.  To these ends, it is reasonable to suggest that the designer of the t-shirt had these intentions in mind, to link Bush with Japanese Imperialism.

High and center of the rectangular-framed portrait of the three leaders, at the point of origin of the sun’s rays, sits an eagle with outstretched wings.  Through my research I discovered that the eagle depicted on the t-shirt’s design matched the same style of eagle icon used by Nazi Germany during WWII.  To the extent most people understand Hitler as a hard-line dictator and his Nazi party rule over Germany to be intent on world domination and perpetrators of horrific acts of mass-genocide, the creators of this shirt seek to equate Bush with the Nazis.  While I don’t believe that Bush has engaged in the same degree of human atrocities, it is clear that the producers of this shirt clearly had this thought in mind.  Some anti-Bush people may suggest that the war against Iraq was undertaken out of a need to protect the United State’s access to oil and has ended up causing many unnecessary deaths.  Similarly, some may argue that the Bush Administration’s policies on enemy combatants and Iraqi prisoners as evidence of similar cruel human treatment previously undertaken by the Nazis.

If I had to give a title to this anti-Bush t-shirt, it would be “War Pigs,” as the statement happens to be the boldest in relative size and most clearly recognizable in lettering in the design.  The title stands out in the forefront and center above the three leaders, colored in red, gothic-style font above the subtitle that reads “evil minds that plot destruction.”  Upon my initial viewing of the text on display, I immediately noticed that the title was taken from an old song titled by the same name.  The subtitle too, I also detected as one of the lines of lyrics from the “War Pigs” song.  The piece was written by the heavy metal band, Black Sabbath and released on their album, Paranoid in 1970.  Although many of those familiar with the group and its onetime lead singer, Ozzy Ozbourne, may not associate the group as spokesmen of strong moral values, yet the evidence suggests its truth.  The song, in no uncertain terms, laments of the evils of war, self-serving politicians, as well as the glory of divine intervention.  The opening stanza of the work’s war scenario depicts a group of evil-minded generals gathering “just like witches at black masses, evil minds that plot destruction,” and “sorcerers of deaths construction.”   The second verse describes politicians as power-driven orchestrators of the killing, relegating “their role to the poor.”  The third verse warns of the impending judgment of divine forces, “wait till their judgment day comes.”  The fourth and final verse of the piece of music describes the aftermath of the apocalypse, the subsequent prosecution of the leader’s crimes and a gleeful Satan.  The lyrics tell of the “War Pigs crawling, begging mercies for their sins, Satan, laughing, spreads his wings.”  (<http://www.black-sabbath.de/lyrics/paranoid.htm>)

Given that “War Pigs,” the song, was released during the heat of the Vietnam War, it makes sense that the United States involvement in the Southeast Asia conflict likely served as inspiration for these anti-war sentiments.  President Bush’s U.S. war in Iraq has most probably served as the primary motivation for the War Pigs t-shirt.  While we have neither seen great anti-war protests in the streets on par with those demonstrations of the Vietnam era, nor military draft or relatively high numbers of American casualties, objective comparisons could be drawn between the two wars.  Recent events in the Iraqi conflict may lead one to foresee a similar result, a situation reminiscent of the same difficulties faced by the U.S. military in the early years of the Vietnam War.  Perhaps the mere reflection of the abhorrent nightmares of Vietnam has prompted the creation of the War Pigs shirt.

The iconography of the War Pigs t-shirt could raise the ugly specter of Vietnam in the minds of those whose memories of the conflict still gives them pause in considering American military involvement in foreign lands.  The idea of politicians sanctioning, managing and possibly using armed conflict for political gain, is suggested by the presence of the political leaders, implicit meaning of the title and iconographic symbols of facism and imperialism.  While as President, George Bush in accordance with our nation’s law also holds the office of Commander and Chief of the Armed Services.  Secretary of State Rumsfeld is also a political leader, appointed by Bush in order to advise the President as well as to manage to a certain extent the U.S. military.  Similar political leaders of the Vietnam conflict were widely believed by many to be responsible for the mismanagement of that war.  The iconographic representation of the shirt too suggests an inappropriate use of political power, namely by invoking the emotionally-charged symbols of Nazi Germany’s former leader Adolph Hitler and the past Japanese Emperor Hirohito.

Notably, similar modes of protest have surfaced in our nation’s recent history, as I have caught sight of another anti-war t-shirt on display from video footage taped during the Vietnam era.  The instance that comes to mind is a shirt worn by the former musician of the Grateful Dead, known as Pigpen.  The shirt is a variation of the American, red, white and blue, stars and stripes flag with one notable exception: bombs in place of stars.  The context in which I noticed the shirt was in the new release of a movie documentary of a concert series across Canada in 1970, called the “Festival Express,” the t-shirt worn on stage by the performer.  Similar precedence of like-minded anti-war clothing may too have inspired the creation of the War Pigs t-shirt.

Interestingly, more of these types of political t-shirts have been popping up over the course of the Bush presidency, as confirmed by a recent article in the October 4, 2004 Newsweek magazine.  The article titled “They Dress to Express,” cites two particular examples of students voicing their anti-Bush sentiments in wearing political t-shirts.  High school student Tim Gies was sent home for displaying his anti-Bush t-shirts at school, sought legal help from the American Civil Liberty Union (ACLU) and won his case and right to wear the shirts.  Another young activist, Bretton Barber wore an anti-Bush t-shirt picturing George Bush together with the message “International Terrorist.”  Barber was similarly “reprimanded” and also subsequently retained legal support from the ACLU.  The author notes that Barber presently continues to wear his anti-Bush t-shirt in college.  It is clear that at least some of the likely consumers of these anti-Bush political t-shirts are young Americans who choose to challenge conservative public opinion through political dress.  (Sulmers 62-63).

In order to understand the motivations for production and consumption of these anti-Bush t-shirts it is important to consider the views of Marxist theory.  As the nineteenth century writer, Karl Marx is often noted for his anti-establishment views and the primary theme of the War Pigs t-shirt is an explicit attack on our leaders.  I suspect that Marx would likely find himself in agreement with the denotative and connotative messages of the War Pigs t-shirt as I interpret it.  On the surface, the shirt portrays the leaders as less than moral revelers of war, while its hidden message connotes an insincere, exploitative relationship the leaders have with the common people (the ones who are actually set in harm’s way).  This underlying message in the lyrics of the War Pigs song lies at the heart of Classical Marxist theory.  A view that asserts that society is troubled with an unequal and exploitative relationship between the classes.  The higher class maintains power through political office which drives the policies that take advantage of the lower classes. The politicians Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld are not engaged in the actual fighting, while they send others off to do battle.  It widely known that neither Cheney nor Bush has ever engaged in direct battle.  Cheney never enlisted in the military and news analysis indicates that Bush likely used his higher-class father’s connections to avoid being sent into the Vietnam conflict.

It is also clear that the theory of Carnivalesque, a branch of Marxism also serves to explain a great deal about the War Pigs t-shirt.  Born out of the work of Mikhail Bakhtin, Carnivalesque or Carnival Culture is a theory used to describe aspects of culture that Bakhtin compared to the carnival-like atmosphere surrounding bawdy or irreverent stage performances during the Middle Ages.  As the lives of the ordinary people at the time was restricted by class, social mores and political subjugation, the environment of the carnival-like environment at the performances allowed a loosening of the societal restraints.  Bakhtin is quoted as describing an “official life, monolithically serious and gloomy, subjugated to a strict hierarchical order…, the other was the life of the carnival square, free and unrestricted, full of blasphemy, the profanation of everything sacred, full of debasing and obscenities…”  (Bahktin, qtd. in Storey 109)  In a similar fashion, the anti-Bush t-shirt may be considered blasphemous, profane, and debasing toward our nation’s leadership.

Additionally, within the perspective of Carnivalism, is the notion that such anti-establishment behavior is healthy for society.  It is agued by writer John Fiske that affording society an outlet for mockery and protest against societal norms and leadership serves to release hostile tension, acting as a “safety valve.”  (Fiske, qtd. in Storey 111).  Whereas a society’s underclass with no means to voice oppositional sentiment may turn to violence, a lower-class group given permission by the elites to set up forms of protest will release their feelings in a more benign nature through carnival culture.  Where the War Pigs t-shirt is not directly a part of a stage performance per se, the context in which I found the anti-conservative cultural text was definitely akin to Bakhtin’s notion of carnival.  The “head shop” business was bulging with anti-government minded paraphernalia, running in contrary opposition to the conservative norms of society and the ideologies of our conservative government.  How might our country’s citizens react to the removal of the right to freedom of speech?   I suggest a resentful mood would likely turn hostile in such a repressive scenario.

In response to the question of what type of a response one might receive by wearing the War Pigs t-shirt, I find it useful to note the works of another social scientist, Roland Barthes.  In John Storey’s synopsis of Barthe’s examination of a French cultural text, he maintains that the (connotations) “… codes mobilized will largely depend on the triple context of the location of the text, the historical moment and the cultural formation (learned perspective) of the reader (Storey 66).  Conversely, on a more shallow surface reading, denotative level, the War Pigs t-shirt is merely a t-shirt adorned with artwork, holding no specific meaning to the viewer.  Thus in consideration of the combination of these three essential factors, it is possible to obtain a deeper, relatively accurate observation of a potential reader/reading of this cultural text.  With these thoughts in mind, contrary to the aforementioned anti-war/anti-Bush motivations for creating and wearing the War Pig t-shirt, a feeling of a different kind would likely come from a viewer based upon various internal and external dynamics.

Consider any of the following conservative locations: an evangelical church, an army recruitment office, the local office of the Republican headquarters, a veteran’s day parade, the current White House, or a funeral honoring the memory of a fallen gulf war soldier.  Appearing in such pro-conservative settings, the likely reading by others would, at least, be interpreted as a disrespectful protest by the person wearing the political shirt.  The wearer may also be subjecting herself to social sanctions which may include prompt removal from the given environment, angry looks, and/or verbal or physical attack. The anti-Bush/anti-war theme of the shirt is likely to be regarded as extremist political propaganda and dismissed as a grossly inaccurate portrayal of President Bush and his colleagues.   The physical location as well as the tendency for certain like-minded conservative people to frequent such places would have a profound effect on the interpretation of the cultural text.

Alternatively, in settings such as the local Democratic headquarters, an anti-gulf war protest, a left-wing bookstore guest author signing featuring Michael Moore, or “head shop” in the Haight/Ashbury district, the shirt may take on an entirely different meaning.  In such places as these, one wearing the War Pigs t-shirt is likely to be met with grinning admiration, a friendly anti-Bush conversation, or a welcoming nod of approval.  In other words, the wearer of the shirt is likely to be greeted with no negative social sanctions, either no response or even positive acknowledgement.  Again, the responses and readings of individuals who predictably frequent these pro-liberal sorts of environments are apt to have a certain set of beliefs in line with the anti-conservative theme embodied in the t-shirt.

Interestingly, as I have mentioned, wearers of the War Pigs shirt have been met with resistance at such relatively neutral societal setting in the public schools.  On one hand, the idea of mutual respect and inoffensiveness to others through the adherence to conservative dress makes sense.  Such school policies restricting the individual’s free speech in this way may serve to create a non-confrontational atmosphere.  On the other hand, the questions remain as to who gets to decide where we draw the lines between potentially offensive and inoffensive?  I think that in two cases of the high school protestors, the courts had made the appropriate decisions.   Our country’s citizen’s quality of life rests in large part on the ability to question authority and voice one’s political opinions.  The alternative restriction on free speech would ultimately lead to increasing resentment toward government and the ultimate real possibility of unwelcome violent protest.

As for those current supporters of President Bush and his foreign policies, I tend to think that these individuals have great admiration for the man for taking a stand against a perceived threat facing the people of the United States.  In their minds, the decision to go to war with enemies in Afghanistan and to launch a war in Iraq amid certain world-wide opposition is construed as brave acts of a strong leader.  To them, Bush is a good leader, self-described follower of the will of a higher power, and one who acts out of an interest in protecting the nation from further terrorist attack.  To Bush supporters the question of war is more likely a justifiable defense issue, a morally justifiable imperative.  The alternative to war in these loyal follower’s minds would be to let the dark forces of terrorism gather strength, a policy of inaction and strategy of restraint that would ultimately lead to greater bloodshed at home and abroad.

As the battle of moral ideology continues on in America, people will persist in following their hearts in judging what style of leadership is appropriate.  Freedom of speech will likely remain in effect in order to protect those opposed and those in support of our leader’s policy decisions.  Given the opportunity to purchase and wear an inflammatory political t-shirt will likely remain an individual’s choice.  Although there may be places where resistance is met by wearers of such anti-establishment clothing, I believe that the ultimate decision to display one’s irreverent feelings toward our nation’s leadership will ultimately be trumped by social conditioning.  For the many like myself, the negative social consequences of wearing the War Pigs t-shirt in certain unsympathetic setting will necessarily cause me to act cautiously in choosing the appropriate time and place to voice my opposition to President Bush.  For ultimately, as a human, I require the social support of others. Togetherness and harmony are values that I and most people prefer over divisiveness and discord.   Yet, the multiple meanings that the War Pigs t-shirt takes on will continue to be as varied as the number of different political opinions evident in our culturally divided country.   

References

Storey, John.

Sulmers, Claire. 2004.  “They Dress to Express.”  Newsweek 62-63
October 2004: 04.

Black Sabbath Fan Club Deutschland.  2004.  <http://www.black-sabbath.de/lyrics/paranoid.htm >.